Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-4_15-cv-00056/USCOURTS-azd-4_15-cv-00056-1/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

Robert Martinez,

Petitioner,

v. 

Charles Ryan, et al.,

Respondents.

No. CV-15-00056-TUC-RCC

ORDER

Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation (“ R&R”) written by 

Magistrate Judge Jacqueline M. Rateau. Doc. 17.

The duties of the district court, when reviewing a R&R of a Magistrate Judge, are 

set forth in Rule 72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 

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

recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b), 28 U.S.C. § 

636(b)(1). When the parties object to a R&R, “[a] judge of the [district] court shall make 

a de novo determination of those portions of the [R&R] to which objection is made.” 28 

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). However, in the absence of 

a timely objection, the Court “need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the 

face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b), Advisory 

Committee Notes (1983); see also United States v. Reyna–Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 

(9th Cir. 2003).

No objections have been filed with this Court. Having reviewed the R&R, the 

Case 4:15-cv-00056-RCC Document 19 Filed 03/11/16 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

Court finds that Magistrate Judge Rateau’s R&R is thorough, well-reasoned, and contains 

no clear error. Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner’s Writ of Habeas Corpus is denied. 

Doc. 1

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motion for Accelerated Review 

of Petitioner’s Writ of Habeas Corpus is denied as moot. Doc. 16.

Dated this 8th day of March, 2016.

Case 4:15-cv-00056-RCC Document 19 Filed 03/11/16 Page 2 of 2