Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_06-cv-00617/USCOURTS-azd-2_06-cv-00617-2/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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Gerald Clarence Gilgren, 

Petitioner, 

v.

Warden Dora B. Schriro; Attorney

General of the State of Arizona; and

Judge Anna M. Baca, 

Respondents. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-06-617-PHX-DGC (BPV)

ORDER

Petitioner Gerald Gilgren is a prisoner incarcerated at the Arizona State Prison

Complex-Eyman. Petitioner has filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 2254. Dkt. #1. The case was assigned to the undersigned Judge and referred to

United States Magistrate Judge Bernardo P. Velasco on March 2, 2006. Dkt. #2.

Judge Velasco issued a report and recommendation (“R&R”) on October 31, 2006.

Dkt. #17. The R&R recommends that the Court dismiss the petition as time-barred. Id. at 8.

Judge Velasco advised the parties that they had ten days to file objections to the R&R. Id.;

see 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). Judge Velasco further advised the

parties that if objections were not timely filed, they may be deemed waived. Id.

The parties did not file objections, which relieves the Court of its obligation to review

the R&R. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) (“A judge of the court shall make de novo

determination of those portions of the [magistrate judge’s] report or specified proposed

Case 2:06-cv-00617-DGC Document 19 Filed 11/30/06 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 -

findings or recommendations to which objection is made.”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) (same);

United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (quoting § 636(b)(1)(C));

Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985) (“[Section 636] does not . . . require any review at

all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection.”). The Court will accept the R&R

and dismiss the petition. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) (stating that the district court “may

accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the

magistrate”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) (same).

In addition, Petitioner named Judge Anna Baca as a respondent to the petition. Dkt.

#1. “It is well-established in [this] Circuit that a petitioner for habeas corpus relief under 28

U.S.C. § 2254 must name ‘the state officer having custody of him as the respondent to the

petition.’” Smith v. Idaho, 392 F.3d 350, 354 (9th Cir. 2004) (quoting Stanley v. Cal.

Supreme Ct., 21 F.3d 359, 360 (9th Cir. 1994)). “‘This person typically is the warden of the

facility in which the petitioner is incarcerated.’” Id. In this case, the warden of the facility

in which Petitioner is incarcerated is Dora Schriro, not Judge Baca. See Dkt. #1. The Court

accordingly will dismiss Judge Baca from this action.

IT IS ORDERED:

1. Magistrate Judge Bernardo P. Velasco’s report and recommendation (Dkt. #17)

is accepted.

2. Petitioner Gerald Clarence Gilgren’s petition for writ of habeas corpus

(Dkt. #1) is dismissed.

3. Respondent Anna M. Baca is dismissed.

4. The Clerk of Court shall terminate this action.

DATED this 30th day of November, 2006.

Case 2:06-cv-00617-DGC Document 19 Filed 11/30/06 Page 2 of 2