Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-4_10-cv-00164/USCOURTS-azd-4_10-cv-00164-2/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Enrique Guadalupe Bracamonte, 

Petitioner, 

vs.

Charles L. Ryan; et al., 

Respondents. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CIV-10-164-TUC-AWT (GEE)

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Pending before the court is a motion for new trial filed by the petitioner, Enrique

Guadalupe Bracamonte, on March 21, 2011. (Doc. 19)

Also pending is a motion to strike filed by the respondents on March 25, 2011. (Doc.

20)

This matter was referred to Magistrate Judge Edmonds pursuant to the Rules of Practice

of this court. See LRCiv 72.1(c). 

Background

On March 15, 2010, Bracamonte filed in this court a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254. On April 23, 2010, he amended his petition with leave of court.

On October 22, 2010, the Magistrate Judge issued a report recommending that the District Court

deny Bracamonte’s First Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus because his claims are

procedurally defaulted. 

Case 4:10-cv-00164-AWT Document 22 Filed 06/23/11 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 -

On November 3, 2010, Bracamonte filed a motion to appoint counsel. On November 22,

2010, the Magistrate Judge issued a report recommending that the District Court deny

Bracamonte’s motion to appoint counsel.

On March 21, 2011, Bracamonte filed the instant motion for a new trial. (Doc. 19) He

moves that this court grant him a new trial pursuant to Ariz.R.Crim.P. 24.1. Id. He argues he

did not knowingly and voluntarily reject the state’s plea offer. Id. On March 25, 2011, the

respondents filed the instant motion to strike Bracamonte’s motion for a new trial. They argue

the motion is an untimely response to this court’s report recommending that the petition for writ

of habeas corpus be denied.

Discussion

Rule 23.1 permits the trial court to grant the defendant a new trial for any of five

enumerated grounds. Ariz.R.Crim.P. “The motion . . . is intended to permit the defendant to

raise for reconsideration any errors, occurring in the conduct of the trial.” Ariz.R.Crim.P. 32.1

(comment). 

This Rule, however, applies only to the state trial court. Ariz.R.Crim.P. 1.1. This court

is not the state trial court and is without jurisdiction to apply this rule. Accordingly,

Bracamonte’s motion should be denied.

The respondents move that this court strike the motion because it is an untimely response

to this court’s Report and Recommendation. The court finds to the contrary that the motion is

not a response to this court’s earlier filing, but an attempt to raise an entirely new issue – an

attempt that this court is without jurisdiction to entertain.

RECOMMENDATION:

The Magistrate Judge recommends the District Court, after its independent review of the

record, enter an order DENYING the motion for new trial filed on March 21, 2011 (Doc. 19)

and DENYING the motion to strike filed on March 25, 2011 (Doc. 20).

Case 4:10-cv-00164-AWT Document 22 Filed 06/23/11 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 -

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636 (b), any party may serve and file written objections within

14 days of being served with a copy of this Report and Recommendation. If objections are not

timely filed, they may be deemed waived. 

The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this Report and Recommendation to the parties

or their counsel. 

DATED this 23rd day of June, 2011.

Case 4:10-cv-00164-AWT Document 22 Filed 06/23/11 Page 3 of 3