Tapia v. Ryan et al
ORDER: Magistrate Judge Rateau's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 13 ) is accepted and adopted. Petitioner's Objection (Doc. 19 ) is overruled. Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1 ) is denied. This case is dismis sed with prejudice. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly and close this case. The Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability. Signed by Judge Rosemary Marquez on 2/17/2016. (See attached Order for complete information)(DLC)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
Julio Cesar Tapia,
Charles L. Ryan, et al.,
Pending before the Court is Petitioner Julio Cesar Tapia’s Petition for Writ of
Habeas Corpus Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 1), and a Report and Recommendation
(Doc. 13) issued by Magistrate Judge Jacqueline M. Rateau. Judge Rateau recommends
denying Petitioner’s § 2254 Petition as untimely. Petitioner filed an Objection (Doc. 19)
to Judge Rateau’s Report and Recommendation.
A district judge must “make a de novo determination of those portions” of a
magistrate judge’s “report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which
objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); see also Rule 8(b) of the Rules Governing
2254 Cases in the United States District Courts.
independent review of the instant Petition, the Report and Recommendation, and the
record. The Court finds that Judge Rateau’s Report and Recommendation appropriately
recommends denial of the Petition as untimely. Nothing in Petitioner’s Objection alters
any of the conclusions made by Judge Rateau.
This Court has made a full and
Before Petitioner can appeal this Court’s judgment, a certificate of appealability
must issue. See 28 U.S.C. §2253(c); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b)(1). A certificate may issue
“only if the applicant has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional
right.” 28 U.S.C. §2253(c)(2). A substantial showing is made if “reasonable jurists
could debate whether . . . the petition should have been resolved in a different manner,”
or if “the issues presented were adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further.”
Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000) (internal quotation omitted). 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 encouragement to proceed
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:
Magistrate Judge Rateau’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 13) is
accepted and adopted.
Petitioner’s Objection (Doc. 19) is overruled.
Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) is denied.
This case is dismissed with prejudice. The Clerk of Court is directed to
enter judgment accordingly and close this case.
Dated this 17th day of February, 2016.
The Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability.
Honorable Rosemary Márquez
United States District Judge
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?