Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_13-cv-01801/USCOURTS-azd-2_13-cv-01801-1/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 

Roberto Hernandez, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

Charles L. Ryan, et al., 

Respondents.

No. CV-13-01801-PHX-NVW (JZB)

ORDER 

and 

DENIAL OF CERTIFICATE OF 

APPEALABILITY AND IN FORMA 

PAUPERIS STATUS

Pending before the Court is the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of 

Magistrate Judge John Z. Boyle (Doc.15) regarding petitioner’s Petition for Writ of 

Habeas Corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 1). The R&R recommends that 

the Petition be denied and dismissed with prejudice. The Magistrate Judge advised the 

parties that they had fourteen days to file objections to the R&R. (R&R at 24, 25 (citing 

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)). Petitioner filed objections on January 28, 2015 (Doc. 18). 

The Court has considered the objections and reviewed the Report and 

Recommendation de novo. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (stating that 

the court must make a de novo determination of those portions of the Report and 

Recommendation to which specific objections are made). Petitioner objects that he was 

not able to file a reply brief because he was in segregation. That objection is harmless 

because Petitioner has been able to state whatever he wishes in his Objections (Doc. 18). 

The Court has considered the Objections to the same extent as if they had been filed 

before the Magistrate Judge prepared the Report and Recommendation. Even with the 

Case 2:13-cv-01801-NVW Document 19 Filed 02/02/15 Page 1 of 2
- 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 

benefit of Petitioner’s additional argument, the Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge’s 

determinations, accepts the recommended decision within the meaning of Rule 72(b), 

Fed. R. Civ. P., and overrules Petitioner’s objections. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (stating 

that the district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or 

recommendations made by the magistrate”). 

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of the 

Magistrate Judge (Doc. 15) is accepted. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court enter judgment denying 

Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 

1) with prejudice. The Clerk shall terminate this action. 

Having considered the issuance of a Certificate of Appealability from the order 

denying Petitioner’s Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus, a Certificate of Appealability 

and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal are denied because dismissal of the 

Petition is justified by a plain procedural bar. 

Dated this 30th day of January, 2015. 

Neil V. Wake

United States District Judge

Case 2:13-cv-01801-NVW Document 19 Filed 02/02/15 Page 2 of 2