Franks v. Ryan et al
ORDERED that the 24 Report and Recommendation is accepted and adopted in full. Further ordered that Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254 is denied, and this case is dismissed with prejudice. The Clerk o f Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly and close this case. Pursuant to Rule 11 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, the Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability, because reasonable jurists would not find the Courts ruling debatable. Signed by Judge Rosemary Marquez on 2/16/2017. (BAR)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
Donnie Ray Franks, Jr.,
Charles Ryan, et al.,
On June 16, 2016, Magistrate Judge Lynnette C. Kimmins issued a Report and
Recommendation (Doc. 24) recommending that this Court deny Petitioner’s Petition for
Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 1). No objections to the
Report and Recommendation were filed.
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). The advisory committee’s notes to Rule
72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure state that, “[w]hen no timely objection is
filed, the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record
in order to accept the recommendation” of a magistrate judge. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)
advisory committee’s note to 1983 addition. See also Johnson v. Zema Sys. Corp., 170
F.3d 734, 739 (7th Cir. 1999) (“If no objection or only partial objection is made, the
district court judge reviews those unobjected portions for clear error.”); Prior v. Ryan,
CV 10-225-TUC-RCC, 2012 WL 1344286, at *1 (D. Ariz. Apr. 18, 2012) (reviewing for
clear error unobjected-to portions of Report and Recommendation).
The Court has reviewed Judge Kimmins’ Report and Recommendation, the
Petition, Respondent’s Answer, and the record. The Court finds no error in Judge
Kimmins’ Report and Recommendation. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 24) is accepted
and adopted in full.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas
Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 1) is denied, and this case is dismissed with
prejudice. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly and close this
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to Rule 11 of the Rules Governing
Section 2254 Cases, the Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability, because
reasonable jurists would not find the Court’s ruling debatable. See Slack v. McDaniel,
529 U.S. 473, 478, 484 (2000).
Dated this 16th day of February, 2017.
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?