GUZMAN-DUARTE v. RYAN, CV-13-00219-PHX-PGR (BSB). (2015)
Court: District Court, D. Arizona
Number: infdco20150310990
Visitors: 1
Filed: Mar. 09, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 09, 2015
Summary: ORDER PAUL G. ROSENBLATT , District Judge . Having reviewed de novo the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Bade notwithstanding that no party has filed any objections to the Report and Recommendation, the Court finds that the Magistrate Judge correctly concluded that the petitioner's habeas petition, timely filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254, should be denied because the petitioner waived his claims asserted in Grounds One, Two and Three by pleading guilty, and because his cla
Summary: ORDER PAUL G. ROSENBLATT , District Judge . Having reviewed de novo the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Bade notwithstanding that no party has filed any objections to the Report and Recommendation, the Court finds that the Magistrate Judge correctly concluded that the petitioner's habeas petition, timely filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254, should be denied because the petitioner waived his claims asserted in Grounds One, Two and Three by pleading guilty, and because his clai..
More
ORDER
PAUL G. ROSENBLATT, District Judge.
Having reviewed de novo the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Bade notwithstanding that no party has filed any objections to the Report and Recommendation, the Court finds that the Magistrate Judge correctly concluded that the petitioner's habeas petition, timely filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, should be denied because the petitioner waived his claims asserted in Grounds One, Two and Three by pleading guilty, and because his claims in Ground Four are not cognizable on federal habeas review. Therefore,
IT IS ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 20) is accepted and adopted by the Court.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that that the petitioner's Petition Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for a Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody, as supplemented, is denied and that this action is dismissed.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a Certificate of Appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal is denied because the petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly.
Source: Leagle
