Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Keno v. Arizona, CV-16-00721-TUC-JGZ. (2018)

Court: District Court, D. Arizona Number: infdco20180529683 Visitors: 18
Filed: May 24, 2018
Latest Update: May 24, 2018
Summary: ORDER JENNIFER G. ZIPPS , District Judge . Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation issued on April 26, 2018 by United States Magistrate Judge D. Thomas Ferraro. (Doc 15.) Magistrate Judge Ferraro recommends dismissing Petitioner's Amended 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus because Petitioner's claims were either waived by Petitioner's guilty plea or were procedurally defaulted without excuse. ( See id. ) The Report informed the parties of the fourteen day deadline for
More

ORDER

Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation issued on April 26, 2018 by United States Magistrate Judge D. Thomas Ferraro. (Doc 15.) Magistrate Judge Ferraro recommends dismissing Petitioner's Amended § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus because Petitioner's claims were either waived by Petitioner's guilty plea or were procedurally defaulted without excuse. (See id.) The Report informed the parties of the fourteen day deadline for filing objections to the Report.

On April 27, 2018, the Petitioner's copy of the Report and Recommendation was returned as undeliverable because Petitioner had been released from custody. Petitioner failed to submit a change of address. (See Doc. 16.)

The deadline for filing objections expired on May 10, 2018. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). No objections have been filed.

Pursuant to LRCiv 83.3(d), an unrepresented party must file a notice of an address change no later than fourteen (14) days before the effective date of the change, and an unrepresented party who is incarcerated must file a notice of an address change no later than seven (7) days after the effective date of the change. See also Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 1441 (9th Cir. 1988) (AA party, not the district court, bears the burden of keeping the court apprised of any changes in his mailing address.")

Despite Petitioner's failure to provide an updated address, the Court has independently reviewed the Report and Recommendation. After such review, the Court finds that recommendation is supported. Accordingly, the Court will adopt Magistrate Judge Ferraro's recommendations. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72; Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149-54 (1985). Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 15) is ADOPTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT Defendant's Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (doc. 9) is DISMISSED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer