Valdez v. Ryan et al

Filing 23

ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation 22 is accepted and adopted in full. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 1) is dismissed. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly and close this case. Signed by Judge Rosemary Marquez on 12/19/19. (See attached Order for complete details). (MYE)

1
2
3
4
5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

7
8

German B Valdez,
Petitioner,

9
10

ORDER

v.

11

No. CV-17-00509-TUC-RM

Mark Brnovich, et al.,

12

Respondents.

13
14

On November 1, 2019, Magistrate Judge D. Thomas Ferraro issued a Report and

15

Recommendation (Doc. 22) recommending that this Court dismiss Petitioner German B.

16

Valdez’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The Petition

17

was filed on October 12, 2017 (Doc. 1), the Government responded (Docs. 7–19), and

18

Petitioner replied (Doc. 20). No objections to the Report and Recommendation were

19

filed.

20

A district judge must “make a de novo determination of those portions” of a

21

magistrate judge’s “report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which

22

objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The advisory committee’s notes to Rule

23

72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure state that, “[w]hen no timely objection is

24

filed, the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record

25

in order to accept the recommendation” of a magistrate judge. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)

26

advisory committee’s note to 1983 addition. See also Johnson v. Zema Sys. Corp., 170

27

F.3d 734, 739 (7th Cir. 1999) (“If no objection or only partial objection is made, the

28

district court judge reviews those unobjected portions for clear error.”); Prior v. Ryan,

1

CV 10-225-TUC-RCC, 2012 WL 1344286, at *1 (D. Ariz. Apr. 18, 2012) (reviewing for

2

clear error unobjected-to portions of Report and Recommendation).

3

The Court has reviewed Judge Ferraro’s Report and Recommendation, the parties’
The Court finds no error in Judge Ferraro’s Report and

4

briefs, and the record.

5

Recommendation. Accordingly,

6
7

IT IS ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 22) is accepted
and adopted in full.

8

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

9

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 1) is dismissed. The Clerk of Court is directed to

10

enter judgment accordingly and close this case.

11

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to Rule 11 of the Rules Governing

12

Section 2254 Cases, the Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability, because

13

reasonable jurists would not find the Court’s ruling debatable. See Slack v. McDaniel,

14

529 U.S. 473, 478, 484 (2000).

15

Dated this 19th day of December, 2019.

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-2-