Tsosie v. Ryan et al

Filing 15

ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 14 - IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the petitioner's Petition Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for a Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody is denied and that this action is dismissed with prejudice. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a Certificate of Appealability shall not issue and that leave to appeal in forma pauperis is denied because the dismissal of the petitioner's § 2254 petition is justified by a plain procedural bar and reasonable jurists would not find the ruling debatable. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly. Signed by Senior Judge Paul G Rosenblatt on 10/17/16. (LAD)

Download PDF
1 WO 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 10 Brandon Williams Tsosie, 11 Petitioner, 12 13 14 15 vs. Charles L. Ryan, et al., Respondents. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. CV-16-08003-PCT-PGR (JZB) ORDER 16 Having reviewed de novo the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate 17 Judge Boyle, filed on August 19, 2016, notwithstanding that no party has filed any 18 objection to the Report and Recommendation, the Court finds that the Magistrate 19 Judge correctly determined that the petitioner’s habeas corpus petition, filed 20 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, should be dismissed as time-barred because it was 21 filed over two years after the expiration of the AEDPA’s one-year statute of 22 limitations and the petitioner has made no legally sufficient showing that the 23 limitations period should be equitably tolled. Therefore, 24 25 26 IT IS ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 14) is accepted and adopted by the Court. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the petitioner’s Petition Under 28 U.S.C. § 1 2254 for a Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody is denied and that 2 this action is dismissed with prejudice. 3 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a Certificate of Appealability shall not issue 4 and that leave to appeal in forma pauperis is denied because the dismissal of the 5 petitioner’s § 2254 petition is justified by a plain procedural bar and reasonable 6 jurists would not find the ruling debatable. 7 8 9 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly. DATED this 17th day of October, 2016. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 -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?