Parra v. Ryan et al
ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING 15 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. Petitioners 1 §2254 Petition is denied and this case is dismissed with prejudice. A Certificate of Appealability is denied and shall not issue. The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly and close the file in this matter. Signed by Judge Jennifer G Zipps on 7/28/14.(BAC)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
Samuel Antonio Parra,
Charles L. Ryan, et al.,
Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation issued by United
States Magistrate Charles R. Pyle that recommends denying Petitioner’s habeas petition
filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §2254. (Doc. 15.) As thoroughly explained by Magistrate
Judge Pyle, Petitioner is not entitled to relief as the claims raised in his petition are not
exhausted or are without merit. As Petitioner’s objections do not undermine the analysis
and proper conclusion reached by Magistrate Judge Pyle, Petitioner’s objections are
rejected and the Report and Recommendation is adopted.
Before Petitioner can appeal this Court's judgment, a certificate of appealability
must issue. See 28 U.S.C. §2253(c) and Fed. R. App. P. 22(b)(1). Federal Rule of
Appellate Procedure 22(b) requires the district court that rendered a judgment denying
the petition made pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §2254 to "either issue a certificate of
appealability or state why a certificate should not issue."
§2253(c)(2) provides that a certificate may issue "only if the applicant has made a
substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." In the certificate, the court
must indicate which specific issues satisfy this showing. See 28 U.S.C. §2253(c)(3). A
substantial showing is made when the resolution of an issue of appeal is debatable among
Additionally, 28 U.S.C.
reasonable jurists, if courts could resolve the issues differently, or if the issue deserves
further proceedings. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484-85 (2000). Upon review
of the record in light of the standards for granting a certificate of appealability, the Court
concludes that a certificate shall not issue as the resolution of the petition is not debatable
among reasonable jurists and does not deserve further proceedings.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:
1. The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 15) is accepted and adopted;
2. Petitioner’s §2254 Petition (Doc. 1) is denied and this case is dismissed with
3. A Certificate of Appealability is denied and shall not issue; and
4. The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly and close the file in this
Dated this 28th day of July, 2014.
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?