Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_09-cv-01139/USCOURTS-azd-2_09-cv-01139-1/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

Peter Mohammed Sharma, 

Petitioner, 

vs.

State of Arizona, et al., 

Respondents. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-09-1139-PHX-ROS

ORDER

Pending before the Court is Magistrate Judge Lawrence O. Anderson’s Report and

Recommendation, which was filed on December 28, 2009. (Doc. 15) Magistrate Judge

Anderson recommends the petition for writ of habeas corpus be denied, and a Certificate of

Appealability also be denied because the dismissal of the Petition is justified by a plain

procedural bar. Petitioner has not filed any objections. 

A district judge “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or

recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 USC § 636(b). Where any party has

filed timely objections to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendations, the district

court’s review of the part objected to is to be de novo. Id.; see also United States v. ReynaTapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003); Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d 1219,

1226 (D. Ariz. 2003) (“Following Reyna-Tapia, this Court concludes that de novo review of

factual and legal issues is required if objections are made, but not otherwise.”) (internal

quotations and citations omitted).

Case 2:09-cv-01139-ROS Document 16 Filed 01/19/10 Page 1 of 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

- 2 -

No objections being made, the Court will adopt the Report and Recommendation in

full. 

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 15) is ADOPTED and

the Petition (Doc. 1) IS DENIED.

FURTHER ORDERED a Certificate of Appealability IS DENIED.

DATED this 19th day of January, 2010.

Case 2:09-cv-01139-ROS Document 16 Filed 01/19/10 Page 2 of 2