Corral v. Ryan et al

Filing 18

ORDERED that: Magistrate Judge Ferraro's 17 Report and Recommendation is adopted. Petitioner's Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is denied. The Clerk of Court shall enter judgment accordingly and close the file in this action. Signed by Judge Jennifer G Zipps on 7/18/2018. (BAR)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

Martin Leon Corral,
Petitioner,

10
11

ORDER

v.

12

No. CV-16-00640-TUC-JGZ

Charles Ryan, et al.,

13

Respondents.

14
15

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

16

States Magistrate Judge D. Thomas Ferraro. (Doc 17.)

Magistrate Judge Ferraro

17

recommends dismissing Petitioner’s § 2254 Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

18

because Petitioner fails to sufficiently allege any ground for federal habeas relief.

19

Magistrate Judge Ferraro recommends, in the alternative, that Ground Two be denied on

20

the merits. (Id.)

21

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

22

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

23

Court will not consider any objections or new evidence.

24

Upon review of the record, the Court will adopt Magistrate Judge Ferraro’s

25

recommendations. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72; Thomas v. Arn, 474

26

U.S. 140, 149–54 (1985).

27

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

28

(COA) must issue. See 28 U.S.C. §2253(c); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b)(1); Rule 11(a) of the

1

Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases.

2

certification of appealability when it enters a final order adverse to the applicant.” Rule

3

11(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2), a

4

COA may issue only when the petitioner “has made a substantial showing of the denial of

5

a constitutional right.”

6

showing. See 28 U.S.C. §2253(c)(3). With respect to claims rejected on the merits, a

7

petitioner “must demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find the district court’s

8

assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong.” Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S.

9

473, 484 (2000). For procedural rulings, a COA will issue only if reasonable jurists could

10

debate whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right and

11

whether the court’s procedural ruling was correct. Id. Applying these standards, the

12

Court concludes that a certificate should not issue, as the resolution of the petition is not

13

debatable among reasonable jurists. Accordingly,

“The district court must issue or deny a

The court must indicate which specific issues satisfy this

14

IT IS ORDERED that:

15

1.

16
17
18
19
20
21

Magistrate Judge Ferraro’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 17) is

ADOPTED;
2.

Petitioner’s Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 4) is

DENIED;
3.

The Clerk of Court shall enter judgment accordingly and close the file in

this action.
Dated this 18th day of July, 2018.

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-2-