Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-3_09-cv-08137/USCOURTS-azd-3_09-cv-08137-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Duane Martin Shepherd, 

Petitioner,

vs.

Charles L. Ryan, et al., 

Respondents.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV09-8137-PCT-SRB

ORDER

On August 24, 2009, Petitioner Duane Martin Shepherd filed his Petition for Writ of

Habeas Corpus raising two claims. Petitioner alleges that the trial court violated his

Fourteenth Amendment right to due process when it refused to permit him to withdraw from

his plea agreement and that he was denied a meaningful right of appellate review in violation

of his constitutional rights. Respondents filed their answer to the Petition on April 22, 2010.

Thereafter, Petitioner filed his reply on June 14, 2010.

On August 5, 2010 the Magistrate Judge issued his Report and Recommendation

recommending that the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus be denied. The Report and

Recommendation concluded that Petitioner had failed to raise either claim before the state

court as a federal or constitutional claim and was therefore procedurally barred from federal

habeas corpus review. As to Petitioner's first claim, the Magistrate Judge also concluded that

Petitioner failed to demonstrate that a refusal to consider his claim would result in a

Case 3:09-cv-08137-SRB Document 21 Filed 09/23/10 Page 1 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 2 -

fundamental miscarriage of justice. A fundamental miscarriage of justice occurs when a

constitutional violation has probably resulted in the conviction of one who is actually

innocent. The Magistrate Judge alternatively considered the merits of this claim and

concluded that even if Plaintiff's claim were considered he was not denied any right to due

process in connection with the entry of his guilty plea. As to Plaintiff's second claim, the

Magistrate Judge concluded that if its merits were reached there was no evidence that the

state court did not consider the merits of his claim and there is no federal constitutional right

to direct appeal or collateral review of convictions and sentencings.

Petitioner timely filed written objections to the Report and Recommendation. In his

written objections he does not contest his procedural default but argues that he has

demonstrated actual innocence because the record establishes that he did not commit an

aggravated assault against a police officer. Petitioner's guilty plea to the amended charge of

Aggravated Assault with a Deadly Weapon or Dangerous Instrument was a guilty plea with

respect to the victim Lucia Cardella not the police officer. He has made no claim of actual

innocence of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon as to Lucia Cardella or of burglary of

Lucia Cardella's residence. Petitioner has failed to object to the Report and Recommendation

with respect to the denial of his second claim.

With respect to the claim of actual innocence, the Court finds that it is without merit.

There is no question that the Petitioner has procedurally defaulted on this claim by failing

to raise any federal constitutional claim before the state court. A claim that he may have

been innocent of aggravated assault against a police officer is irrelevant to his conviction for

aggravated assault of Lucia Cardella. The Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge that if this

claim could be considered on the merits it is without merit for the reasons expressed by the

Magistrate Judge in the Report and Recommendation.

IT IS ORDERED overruling Petitioner's objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report

and Recommendation.

Case 3:09-cv-08137-SRB Document 21 Filed 09/23/10 Page 2 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 3 -

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED adopting the Report and Recommendation of the

Magistrate Judge as the order of this Court.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus.

DATED this 23rd day of September, 2010.

Case 3:09-cv-08137-SRB Document 21 Filed 09/23/10 Page 3 of 3