Hartman #252215 v. Ryan et al

Filing 22

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION, the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation 19 is accepted; Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus 1 is denied and dismissed with prejudice; in the event Petitioner files an appeal , issuance of a Certificate of Appealability is denied because reasonable jurists would not find the decision on the constitutional claims debatable or wrong; the Clerk shall enter judgment of dismissal with prejudice. Signed by Senior Judge James A Teilborg on 9/5/14. (REW)

1

WO

2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

Johann Hartman,
Petitioner,

10
11

vs.

12
Charles L Ryan, et al.,
13
Respondents.
14

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. CV 13-8190-PCT-JAT
ORDER

15
16

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

17

(“Petition”) (Doc. 1). The Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”)

18

(Doc. 19) recommending that the Petition be denied.

19

Neither party has filed objections to the R&R. Accordingly, the Court hereby accepts

20

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

21

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

22

(emphasis added)); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en

23

banc) (“statute makes it clear that the district judge must review the magistrate judge’s

24

findings and recommendations de novo if objection is made, but not otherwise” (emphasis

25

in original)); see also Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F.Supp.2d 1219, 1226 (D. Ariz. 2003).

26

Based on the foregoing,

27

IT IS ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 19)

28

is ACCEPTED; accordingly,

1

•

2
3

Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) is denied and
dismissed with prejudice,

•

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

4

is denied because reasonable jurists would not find the decision on the

5

constitutional claims debatable or wrong. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S.

6

473, 484 (2000), and

7

•

the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment of dismissal with prejudice.

8

DATED this 5th day of September, 2014.

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-