Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Lundeen v. Ryan, CV-18-00304-TUC-FRZ. (2019)

Court: District Court, D. Arizona Number: infdco20190425829 Visitors: 9
Filed: Apr. 23, 2019
Latest Update: Apr. 23, 2019
Summary: ORDER FRANK R. ZAPATA , Senior District Judge . Before the Court for consideration is a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, brought pro se pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254 by Petitioner Shayne Patrick Lundeen, and the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge recommending that the Court enter an order dismissing the petition as time-barred. This matter was referred to Magistrate Judge Leslie A. Bowman, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. 636(b), Rule 72, Fed.R.Civ.P., and Local R
More

ORDER

Before the Court for consideration is a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, brought pro se pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 by Petitioner Shayne Patrick Lundeen, and the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge recommending that the Court enter an order dismissing the petition as time-barred.

This matter was referred to Magistrate Judge Leslie A. Bowman, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), Rule 72, Fed.R.Civ.P., and Local Rules 72.1 and 72.2 of the Rules of Practice of the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, for further proceedings and Report and Recommendation.

Magistrate Judge Bowman issued her Report and Recommendation on March 13, 2019, recommending that the Court, after its independent review of the record, enter an order dismissing the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus based on Petitioner having failed to make a credible showing of actual innocence to overcome the procedural bar and expiration of the 1-year period of limitation imposed under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d).

The parties were advised that, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), any party may serve and file written objections within 14 days of being served with a copy of the Report and Recommendation, and that, if objections are not timely, they may be deemed waived. No objections were filed.

The Court finds, after consideration of all matters presented and an independent review of the record herein, that the Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus shall be denied and this action shall be dismissed in accordance with the Report and Recommendation.

Based on the foregoing,

IT IS ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 23) is hereby ACCEPTED and ADOPTED as the findings of fact and conclusions of law by this Court;

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) is DENIED and this action is hereby DISMISSED;

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is directed 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