Filed: Jan. 22, 2020
Latest Update: Jan. 22, 2020
Summary: ORDER SUSAN R. BOLTON , District Judge . Petitioner filed his Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254 on November 6, 2018 raising three grounds for relief: 1) that his constitutional due process protections were violated when his plea agreement was breached by the State's use of that conviction to revoke his parole; 2) that his guilty plea was involuntary, the superior court lacked jurisdiction to accept the plea and he was actually innocent; and 3) that his due proc
Summary: ORDER SUSAN R. BOLTON , District Judge . Petitioner filed his Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254 on November 6, 2018 raising three grounds for relief: 1) that his constitutional due process protections were violated when his plea agreement was breached by the State's use of that conviction to revoke his parole; 2) that his guilty plea was involuntary, the superior court lacked jurisdiction to accept the plea and he was actually innocent; and 3) that his due proce..
More
ORDER
SUSAN R. BOLTON, District Judge.
Petitioner filed his Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 on November 6, 2018 raising three grounds for relief: 1) that his constitutional due process protections were violated when his plea agreement was breached by the State's use of that conviction to revoke his parole; 2) that his guilty plea was involuntary, the superior court lacked jurisdiction to accept the plea and he was actually innocent; and 3) that his due process and Sixth Amendment rights were violated when the State suppressed exculpatory evidence. Respondents filed their Response to Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus on December 28, 2018. No reply was filed. On December 10, 2019, the Magistrate Judge issued her Report and Recommendation recommending that the petition be denied and dismissed with prejudice.
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 notes that Petitioner is represented by counsel.
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 because it is untimely.
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 and procedural bar and reasonable jurists would not find the procedural ruling debatable.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying as moot Petitioner's Motion for the Immediate Return of Petitioner to the State of Arizona for the Pendency of This Proceeding. (Doc. 28)
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED directing the Clerk to enter judgment accordingly.
