Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-3_06-cv-02835/USCOURTS-azd-3_06-cv-02835-1/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

1

 The Court rejects the petitioner’s conclusory argument that his lack of

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Kenneth Denwoody Steed, 

Petitioner,

vs.

Dora Schriro, et al., 

Respondents.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-06-2835-PCT-PGR (MEA)

 

 ORDER

Pending before the Court is Magistrate Judge Aspey’s Report and

Recommendation, wherein he recommends that this action, filed pursuant to 42

U.S.C. § 2254, be dismissed with prejudice because the petitioner did not

properly exhaust any of his claims in the state court, has not shown cause for, nor

prejudice arising from, his procedural default, and does not assert that he is

factually innocent of the charges for which he was convicted. Having reviewed

the Report and Recommendation de novo in light of Petitioner’s Responses to

Object to the Report and Recommendation of Cause and Prejudice (doc. #19),

the Court finds that the Magistrate Judge correctly concluded that the Court may

not award federal habeas relief on the merits of any of the petitioner’s claims and

that the petitioner’s arguments to the contrary are meritless as a matter of law.1

Case 3:06-cv-02835-PGR Document 20 Filed 10/12/07 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

access to legal reference materials while incarcerated constitutes cause for his

failure to raise any of his federal habeas claims in the state court. See Hughes v.

Idaho State Bd. of Corrections, 800 F.2d 905, 909 (9th Cir. 1986) (Court held that

an illiterate prisoner’s lack of legal assistance in prison does not constitute cause

for a procedural default.)

- 2 -

Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation

(doc. #18) is accepted and adopted by the Court. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas

Corpus by a Person in State Custody, filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, is

denied and that this action is dismissed with prejudice. The Clerk of the Court

shall enter judgment accordingly.

DATED this 11th day of October, 2007.

Case 3:06-cv-02835-PGR Document 20 Filed 10/12/07 Page 2 of 2