Krassow v. Arizona, State of

Filing 22

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 21 . Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) is DENIED. This case is dismissed with prejudice. The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly. Signed by Judge Jennifer G Zipps on 4/25/17. (See attached PDF for complete information.) (KAH)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

Jeffrey A Krassow,
Petitioner,

10
11

ORDER

v.

12

No. CV-16-00054-TUC-JGZ

State of Arizona, et al.,

13

Respondents.

14
15

Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation issued by United

16

States Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Rateau that recommends denying Petitioner’s Petition

17

for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (Doc. 21.)

18

A review of the record reflects that the parties have not filed any objections to the

19

Report and Recommendation and the time to file objections has expired. As such, the

20

Court will not consider any objections or new evidence.

21

The Court has reviewed the record and concludes that Magistrate Judge Rateau’s

22

recommendations are not clearly erroneous. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P.

23

72; Johnson v. Zema Systems Corp., 170 F.3d 734, 739 (7th Cir. 1999); see also Conley

24

v. Crabtree, 14 F.Supp.2d 1203, 1204 (D. Or. 1998).

25

Before Petitioner can appeal this Court's judgment, a certificate of appealability

26

must issue. See 28 U.S.C. §2253(c) and Fed. R. App. P. 22(b)(1). Federal Rule of

27

Appellate Procedure 22(b) requires the district court that rendered a judgment denying

28

the petition made pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §2254 to "either issue a certificate of

1

appealability or state why a certificate should not issue."

2

§2253(c)(2) provides that a certificate may issue "only if the applicant has made a

3

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." In the certificate, the court

4

must indicate which specific issues satisfy this showing. See 28 U.S.C. §2253(c)(3). A

5

substantial showing is made when the resolution of an issue of appeal is debatable among

6

reasonable jurists, if courts could resolve the issues differently, or if the issue deserves

7

further proceedings. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484-85 (2000). Upon review

8

of the record in light of the standards for granting a certificate of appealability, the Court

9

concludes that a certificate shall not issue as the resolution of the petition is not debatable

Additionally, 28 U.S.C.

10

among reasonable jurists and does not deserve further proceedings.

11

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:

12

1.

13

adopted;

14

2.

Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) is DENIED;

15

3.

This case is dismissed with prejudice. The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment

16

accordingly.

17

Magistrate Judge Rateau’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 21) is accepted and

Dated this 25th day of April, 2017.

18
19
20

Honorable Jennifer G. Zipps
United States District Judge

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-2-