Godwin v. Bock et al

Filing 45

ORDER ADOPTING 41 Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation. Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, as amended, is denied and dismissed with prejudice. In the event Petitioner files an appeal, issuance of a certificate of a ppealability is denied because denial of the petition is based on a plain procedural bar and jurists of reason would not find this Court's procedural ruling debatable. The Clerk shall enter judgment of dismissal with prejudice. Signed by Senior Judge James A Teilborg on 7/15/15. (LSP)

1

WO

2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

Carlton Errol Godwin,

No. CV-13-08078-PCT-JAT

Petitioner,

10
11

v.

12

ORDER

Charles L Ryan, et al.,

13

Respondents.

14
15

Pending before the Court is Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, as

16

amended (“Petition”).

The Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation

17

(“R&R”) (Doc. 41) recommending that the Petition be denied because it is barred by the

18

statute of limitations.

19

Respondents did not file objections to the R&R. This Court granted Petitioner an

20

extension of time to file objections (Doc. 44), but Petitioner did not file objections.

21

Because neither party has filed objections to the R&R, the Court hereby accepts the

22

R&R. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985) (finding that district courts are not

23

required to conduct “any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an

24

objection” (emphasis added)); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th

25

Cir. 2003) (en banc) (“statute makes it clear that the district judge must review the

26

magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations de novo if objection is made, but not

27

otherwise” (emphasis in original)); see also Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F.Supp.2d 1219,

28

1226 (D. Ariz. 2003).

1

Based on the foregoing,

2

IT IS ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc.

3

41) is ACCEPTED; accordingly,
$

4
5

Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, as amended, is

denied and dismissed with prejudice,
$

6

in the event Petitioner files an appeal, issuance of a certificate of

7

appealability is denied because denial of the petition is based on a plain procedural bar

8

and jurists of reason would not find this Court’s procedural ruling debatable. See Slack v.

9

McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000), and
$

10
11
12

the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment of dismissal with

prejudice.
Dated this 15th day of July, 2015.

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-2-