Turcios v. Shinn et al
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION re: 9 Report and Recommendation. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1 ) is dismissed with prejudice. The issuance of a certificate of appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal is denied because Petitioner has not demonstrated that reasonable jurists could find the ruling debatable or conclude that the issues presented are adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further. Signed by Judge Michael T Liburdi on 11/14/23. (DXD)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
Christian Salvador Turcios,
David Shinn, et al.,
Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Michael
T. Morrissey (“R & R”) (Doc. 9) recommending that the Petition for Writ of Habeas
Corpus be dismissed with prejudice, and that a certificate of appealability and leave to
proceed in forma pauperis on appeal be denied. Petitioner has not filed any objections to
the R & R. The deadline to do so passed fourteen days following service of the R & R,
which was mailed to Petitioner on August 22, 2023.
In reviewing an R & R, the Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in
part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(b)(1). “[T]he district judge must review the magistrate judge's finding and
recommendations de novo if objection is made, but not otherwise.” United States v.
Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (emphasis in original); see
Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985) (finding that the District Court need not
conduct “any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection”).
No objections having been received, the Court will accept and adopt the R & R in
IT IS ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 9) is accepted.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc.
1) is dismissed with prejudice.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying the issuance of a certificate of
appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal because Petitioner has not
demonstrated that reasonable jurists could find the ruling debatable or conclude that the
issues presented are adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further. See Miller-El
v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 327 (2003).
Dated this 14th day of November, 2023.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?