Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-3_14-cv-08245/USCOURTS-azd-3_14-cv-08245-1/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 

NOT FOR PUBLICATION 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Morgan Kenneth Miller, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

Charles L. Ryan, et al., 

Respondents.

No. CV-14-08245-PCT-JJT

ORDER 

 At issue is the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”)(Doc. 18) prepared in this 

matter by Magistrate Judge John Z. Boyle which recommends that the Court deny the 

Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and dismiss it with prejudice. Petitioner was served 

with a copy of the R&R by mail on November 2, 2015. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 

636(b)(1) and Rules 6 and 72, Fed. R. Civ. Pr., Petitioner had until November 20, 2015 to 

file any specific written objections to the R&R. More than 60 days have elapsed since 

that deadline and Petitioner has filed no objections. The R&R warned Petitioner that his 

failure to file timely objections "may result in the acceptance of the Report and 

Recommendation by the District Court without further review." (Doc. 18 at p. 12-13.) 

The Court therefore is free to accept the R&R without further review. See United States 

v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003). Nonetheless, the Court has 

conducted a review of the Petition in this matter (Doc. 1), Respondents' Limited Answer 

and Response thereto (Doc. 11), and the R&R. Upon that review, the Court concludes 

that Judge Boyle's recommendations are well taken and correctly apply the limitations 

period contained in 28 U.S.C. Section 2244 (“AEDPA”), including its provisions for 

Case 3:14-cv-08245-JJT Document 19 Filed 01/22/16 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 

statutory tolling, and the case law governing consideration of equitable tolling, to 

conclude that the Petition is untimely by many years. The court adopts the reasoning in 

the R&R in whole. 

IT IS ORDERED denying in dismissing with prejudice the Petition for Writ of 

Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 2254 (Doc. 1). 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED adopting in whole the Report and 

Recommendation prepared in this matter (Doc. 18). 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying a Certificate of Appealability and leave to 

proceed in forma pauperis, as the dismissal of the instant Petition is justified by a plain 

procedural bar, and jurists of reason would not find the procedural ruling debatable. 

 Dated this 22nd day of January, 2016. 

 

 Honorable John J. Tuchi 

 United States District Judge 

Case 3:14-cv-08245-JJT Document 19 Filed 01/22/16 Page 2 of 2