Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-00642/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-00642-1/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

 1 The Magistrate Judge found that Petitioner’s claims are procedurally barred because

at this late date she cannot return to the state courts to present her claims. See Ariz. R.Crim.

P. 32.1, 32.2(a) & (b); see generally Stewart v. Smith, 536 U.S. 856, 860-61 (2002)(holding

that Rule 32.2(a) is an adequate and independent procedural bar). Additionally, she would

be time-barred from seeking appellate review of the trial court’s denial of her PCR. See Ariz.

R. Crim. P. 32.9(c). Any return now to state court would therefore be futile. Therefore,

Petitioner’s claims are procedurally defaulted. Furthermore, Petitioner has not claimed or

demonstrated that a miscarriage of justice would result if her claims are not considered, or

that cause exists for her noncompliance with state procedural rules.

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Mercedes Navarro, )

)

Petitioner, ) CV 08-0642-PHX-PGR (MHB)

)

v. ) ORDER

)

Dora B. Schriro, et al., )

)

Respondents. )

The Court having reviewed de novo the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate

Judge Burns and no party having filed any objection to the Report and Recommendation,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation

(Doc. 8) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED by the Court.1

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

(Doc. 1) is DENIED and DISMISSED with prejudice. 

DATED this 10th day of December, 2008.

Case 2:08-cv-00642-PGR Document 9 Filed 12/10/08 Page 1 of 1