Cheney #137508 v. Arizona Department of Corrections et al
Filing
21
ORDER ADOPTING 19 Magistrate Judge Michelle Burns' Report and Recommendation. The Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 7 ) is denied and dismissed with prejudice. A certificate of appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal are denied. The Clerk of Court shall terminate this action. Signed by Judge Steven P Logan on 10/22/15. (EJA)
1
2
3
4
5
6
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
8
Jonathan E. Cheney,
9
10
Petitioner,
vs.
11
12
David Green, et al.,
Respondents.
13
14
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. CV-15-08037-PCT-SPL (MHB)
ORDER
15
Petitioner Jonathan E. Cheney has filed an Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas
16
Corpus pursuant to pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 7). On September 15, 2015, the
17
Honorable Michelle H. Burns, United States Magistrate Judge, issued a Report and
18
Recommendation (“R&R”) (Doc. 19), recommending that the Court deny and dismiss the
19
amended petition. Judge Burns advised the parties that they had fourteen (14) days to file
20
objections to the R&R and that failure to file timely objections could be considered a
21
waiver of the right to obtain review of the R&R. (Doc. 19 at 7) (citing 28 U.S.C. §
22
636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 6, 72; United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th
23
Cir. 2003)).
24
The parties did not file objections, which relieves the Court of its obligation to
25
review the R&R. See Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d at 1121; Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149
26
(1985) (“[Section 636(b)(1)] does not . . . require any review at all . . . of any issue that is
27
not the subject of an objection.”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) (“The district judge must
28
determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge’s disposition that has been properly
1
objected to.”). The Court has nonetheless reviewed the R&R and finds that it is well-
2
taken. The Court will adopt the R&R and deny the amended petition. See 28 U.S.C. §
3
636(b)(1) (stating that the district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in
4
part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3)
5
(“The district judge may accept, reject, or modify the recommended disposition; receive
6
further evidence; or return the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions.”).
7
Accordingly,
8
IT IS ORDERED:
9
1.
10
11
12
13
14
That Magistrate Judge Michelle H. Burn’s Report and Recommendation
(Doc. 19) is accepted and adopted by the Court;
2.
That the Ameneded Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 7) is denied and dismissed with prejudice;
3.
That a certificate of appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on
appeal are denied; and
15
4.
That the Clerk of Court shall terminate this action.
16
Dated this 22nd day of October, 2015.
17
18
Honorable Steven P. Logan
United States District Judge
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
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?