Cagle #079874 v. Ryan et al

Filing 50

ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Bowman's 49 Report and Recommendation is accepted and adopted by this Court as the findings of fact and conclusions of law. Ordered that the 33 Second Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is denied and this action is dismissed with prejudice in favor of Defendants. The Clerk's Office is directed to enter a separate Final Judgment in accordance with this Order. This action is terminated. Signed by Senior Judge David C Bury on 2/23/2017.(BAR)

Download PDF
1 WO 2 3 4 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 6 Shaine Carl Cagle, 7 Petitioner, 8 vs. 9 Charles L. Ryan, et al., 10 Defendants. 11 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CV-16-111-TUC-DCB ORDER 12 Magistrate Judge Bowman issued her Report and Recommendation on 1/18/2017, 13 recommending that the District Court deny the Second Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas 14 Corpus and dismiss the action with prejudice. A copy was sent to all parties on 1/18/2017, 15 notifying all parties that written objections must be filed within fourteen days of service. 28 16 U.S.C. §636(b). No objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation have 17 been filed. Consequently, any objections that have not been raised are waived and will not 18 be addressed by the Court. 19 The Court, having made an independent review of the record, rules as follows: 20 IT IS ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Bowman’s Report and Recommendation 21 (Doc. 49) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED by this Court as the findings of fact and 22 conclusions of law. 23 IT IS ORDERED that the Second Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is 24 DENIED (Doc. 33) and this action is dismissed with prejudice in favor of Defendants. The 25 Clerk’s Office is directed to enter a separate Final Judgment in accordance with this Order. 26 This action is terminated. 27 28 DATED this 23rd day of February, 2017.

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?