Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

MILLAN-CAMACHO v. RYAN, CV-15-08031-PCT-SRB. (2015)

Court: District Court, D. Arizona Number: infdco20151113a01 Visitors: 8
Filed: Nov. 12, 2015
Latest Update: Nov. 12, 2015
Summary: ORDER SUSAN R. BOLTON , District Judge . Petitioner filed his Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254 on March 11, 2015 raising two grounds for relief: 1) ineffective assistance of trial counsel; and 2) that he is an "immigrant or alien and not understanding the law." Respondents filed their Response to Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus on August 18, 2015. No reply was filed. On October 20, 2015, the Magistrate Judge issued her Report and Recommendation
More

ORDER

Petitioner filed his Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 on March 11, 2015 raising two grounds for relief: 1) ineffective assistance of trial counsel; and 2) that he is an "immigrant or alien and not understanding the law." Respondents filed their Response to Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus on August 18, 2015. No reply was filed. On October 20, 2015, the Magistrate Judge issued her Report and Recommendation recommending that the petition be denied.

In her Report and Recommendation the Magistrate Judge advised the parties that they had fourteen days from the date of service of a copy of the Report and Recommendation within which to file specific written objections with the Court. The time to file such objections has expired and no objections to the Report and Recommendation have been filed.

The Court finds itself in agreement with the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge.

IT IS ORDERED adopting the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge as the order of this Court.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and dismissing it with prejudice.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying any Certificate of Appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal because dismissal of the Petition is justified by a plain procedural bar and reasonable jurists would not find the procedural ruling debatable.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED directing the Clerk to enter judgment accordingly.

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