Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-4_12-cv-00823/USCOURTS-azd-4_12-cv-00823-1/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Gregory A. Bevel, 

Petitioner, 

vs.

Charles L. Ryan, et al., 

Respondents. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 12-823-TUC-FRZ (LAB)

ORDER

Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation issued by United States

Magistrate Judge Bowman that recommends denying Petitioner’s habeas petition filed

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §2254. A review of the record reflects that the parties have not filed

any objections to the Report and Recommendation and the time to file objections has expired.

As such, the Court will not consider any objections or new evidence.

The Court has reviewed the record and concludes that Magistrate Judge Bowman’s

recommendations are not clearly erroneous and they are adopted. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1);

Fed. R. Civ. P. 72; Johnson v. Zema Systems Corp., 170 F.3d 734, 739 (7th Cir. 1999);

Conley v. Crabtree, 14 F. Supp. 2d 1203, 1204 (D. Or. 1998). 

Petitioner has filed a motion for a certificate of appealability. Before Petitioner can appeal

this Court's judgment, a certificate of appealability must issue. See 28 U.S.C. §2253(c) and

Fed. R. App. P. 22(b)(1). Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 22(b) requires the district

court that rendered a judgment denying the petition made pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §2254 to

"either issue a certificate of appealability or state why a certificate should not issue."

Case 4:12-cv-00823-FRZ Document 16 Filed 05/09/14 Page 1 of 2
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 -

Additionally, 28 U.S.C. §2253(c)(2) provides that a certificate may issue "only if the

applicant has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." In the

certificate, the court must indicate which specific issues satisfy this showing. See 28 U.S.C.

§2253(c)(3). A substantial showing is made when the resolution of an issue of appeal is

debatable among reasonable jurists, if courts could resolve the issues differently, or if the

issue deserves further proceedings. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484-85 (2000).

Upon review of the record in light of the standards for granting a certificate of appealability,

the Court concludes that a certificate shall not issue as the resolution of the petition is not

debatable among reasonable jurists and does not deserve further proceedings. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:

(1) The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 14) is accepted and adopted.

(2) Petitioner’s §2254 habeas petition is denied and this case is dismissed with prejudice.

(3) Petitioner’s motion (Doc. 15) is denied; a Certificate of Appealability is denied and shall

not issue.

(4) The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly and close the file in this matter.

DATED this 9th day of May, 2014.

Case 4:12-cv-00823-FRZ Document 16 Filed 05/09/14 Page 2 of 2