Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_14-cv-01876/USCOURTS-azd-2_14-cv-01876-1/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 

Monty L. Helms, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

Charles L. Ryan; et al., 

 Respondents.

No. CV-14-01876-PHX-NVW (ESW)

ORDER 

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

Magistrate Judge Eileen S. Willett (Doc. 12) regarding petitioner’s Petition for Writ of 

Habeas Corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 1). The R&R recommends that 

the Petition be denied and dismissed with prejudice. The Magistrate Judge advised the 

parties that they had fourteen days to file objections to the R&R. (R&R at 24 (citing 28 

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)); Fed. R. Civ. P. 6, 72. Petitioner filed objections on October 19, 

2015 (Doc. 13). 

The Court has considered the objections and reviewed the Report and 

Recommendation de novo. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (stating that 

the court must make a de novo determination of those portions of the Report and 

Recommendation to which specific objections are made). The Court agrees with the 

Magistrate Judge’s determinations, accepts the recommended decision within the 

meaning of Rule 72(b), Fed. R. Civ. P., and overrules Petitioner’s objections. See 28 

Case 2:14-cv-01876-NVW Document 14 Filed 10/29/15 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 

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (stating that the district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole 

or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate”). 

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Report and Recommendation of the 

Magistrate Judge (Doc.12) is accepted. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner’s requests for an evidentiary hearing, 

discovery, and the appointment of counsel are denied. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court enter judgment denying 

and dismissing Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed pursuant to 28 

U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 1) with prejudice. The Clerk shall terminate this action. 

Having considered the issuance of a Certificate of Appealability from the order 

denying Petitioner’s Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus, a Certificate of Appealability 

and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal are denied because dismissal of the 

Petition is justified by a plain procedural bar and Petitioner has not made a substantial 

showing of the denial of a constitutional right in his remaining claims for relief. 

Dated this 29th day of October, 2015. 

Neil V. Wake

United States District Judge

Case 2:14-cv-01876-NVW Document 14 Filed 10/29/15 Page 2 of 2