Barger v. Ryan et al

Filing 17

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 16 and Denying and Dismissing with prejudice the petition for writ of habeas corpus (doc. 1). Because petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right and because the dismissal of the petition is justified by a plain procedural bar and juristsof reason would not find the procedural ruling debatable, IT IS FURTHER ORDERED DENYING a certificate of appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. Signed by Judge Frederick J Martone on 1/25/12. (DMT)

1

WO

2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
Edward James Barger,
9
Petitioner,
10
vs.
11
Charles L. Ryan, et al.,
12
Respondents.
13

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. CV-11-8034-PCT-FJM
ORDER

14
The court has before it petitioner’s petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28
15
U.S.C. § 2254 (doc. 1), respondents’ answer (doc. 15), and the Report and Recommendation
16
of the United States Magistrate Judge, recommending that the petition for writ of habeas
17
corpus be denied and dismissed with prejudice (doc. 16). The petitioner did not object to the
18
Report and Recommendation and the time for doing so has expired.
19
Pursuant to Rule 8(b), Rules Governing § 2254 Cases, we accept the recommended
20
decision of the United States Magistrate Judge. Therefore, IT IS ORDERED DENYING
21
AND DISMISSING with prejudice the petition for writ of habeas corpus (doc. 1).
22
Because petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional
23
right and because the dismissal of the petition is justified by a plain procedural bar and jurists
24
of reason would not find the procedural ruling debatable, IT IS FURTHER ORDERED
25
DENYING a certificate of appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal.
26
27
28

DATED this 25th day of January, 2012.