Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_07-cv-02169/USCOURTS-azd-2_07-cv-02169-2/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

Jeff M. Welch, 

Petitioner, 

v.

Dora B. Schriro, et al., 

Respondents. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-07-02169 PHX-NVW (CRP)

ORDER

and

DENIAL OF CERTIFICATE OF

APPEALABILITY

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

Judge Pyle (Doc. 29) regarding Jeff M. Welch’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 1). Welch timely objected to certain portions of the R&R.

(Doc. 30.) This Court has made “a de novo determination of those portions of the report or

specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection [has been] made.” 28

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The Court accepts and adopts the R&R, except as stated below.

Welch was convicted in Arizona state court on ten counts of possessing child

pornography, corresponding to ten printed images that police found in Welch’s home. Each

image featured a child younger than 15 years. In such circumstances, Arizona punishes

possessing child pornography with a minimum of 10 years and a maximum of 24 years in

prison. A.R.S. § 13-705(D). The state court sentenced Welch to 17 years on each count, and

as required by Arizona law, directed that those sentences run consecutively. See A.R.S. § 13-

Case 2:07-cv-02169-NVW-CRP Document 31 Filed 09/24/10 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 -

705(M). Thus, Welch received an aggregate sentence of 170 years for his child pornography

offenses.

In a related state court prosecution, a jury convicted Welch of molesting a 4-year-old

and a 9-year-old child, for which he received two 35-year sentences. These sentences were

informed, in part, by Welch’s admission that he had previously molested a 6-year-old child

in Tennessee.

Welch first claims that Arizona’s child pornography statute is overbroad because it

contains no exception for simulated images. The R&R does not address this issue. Rather,

the magistrate judge already ruled on this issue in a previous report and recommendation

(Doc. 10) and Welch did not object. The Court then accepted the magistrate judge’s

recommendation as to that issue (Doc. 11). Welch’s current objection is not timely, and

Welch gives no explanation for his previous failure to object nor reason for this Court to

reconsider its previous ruling. The Court therefore finds that Welch has waived this

objection.

Welch next claims that his sentence of 17 years for possession of each image, and his

aggregate sentence of 170 years, is grossly disproportionate to his crime and thus violates the

Eight Amendment’s prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment. Considering the narrow

federal habeas standard applicable to this case — whether Welch’s sentence “was contrary

to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law,” 28

U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1) — and given Welch’s criminal history, including three instances of child

molestation, this Court cannot say that Welch received a grossly disproportionate sentence.

See Ewing v. California, 538 U.S. 11, 28 (2003) (criminal history relevant to Eighth

Amendment disproportionality analysis). The Court therefore finds it unnecessary to reach

(and therefore does not adopt the R&R’s discussion of) the issues Welch raises regarding

Arizona’s apparent treatment of each image possessed as a separate offense, which (when

coupled with Arizona’s consecutive sentencing requirement) may lead to unusually long

sentences. Whether Arizona’s sentencing scheme might create gross disproportionality for

Case 2:07-cv-02169-NVW-CRP Document 31 Filed 09/24/10 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 -

other possessors of child pornography does not inform the analysis for Welch himself.

IT IS ORDERED that the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) is denied. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk enter judgment denying the Petition for

Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1). The Clerk shall terminate this case.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a Certificate of Appealability is DENIED.

Probable cause does not exist for the appeal. The applicant has not made a substantial

showing of the denial of a constitutional right. 

DATED this 24th day of September, 2010.

Case 2:07-cv-02169-NVW-CRP Document 31 Filed 09/24/10 Page 3 of 3