Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-4_10-cv-00500/USCOURTS-azd-4_10-cv-00500-1/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

MONTE EUGENE JENKINS, 

Petitioner, 

vs.

CHARLES L. RYAN, 

Respondent. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 10-500-TUC-AWT

ORDER

Pending before the court is Monte Eugene Jenkins’ Petition for Writ of Habeas

Corpus, brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 1).

On October 24, 2011, Magistrate Judge D. Thomas Ferraro issued a Report and

Recommendation (R&R) to this Court, recommending the denial of Jenkins’ petition (Doc.

15). Petitioner has filed no objections to the R&R. In such circumstances, the Court will

modify or set aside only those portions of the R&R that are clearly erroneous or contrary to

law. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72; United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d

1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc). 

After conducting an independent review of the record, the Court concludes that in all

respects the R&R is not clearly erroneous or contrary to law, and therefore adopts the R&R

in full. 

Case 4:10-cv-00500-AWT Document 18 Filed 02/07/12 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 -

Further, the Court concludes that Jenkins has not “made a substantial showing of the

denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). Thus, the Court declines to issue

a certificate of appealability. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). 

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED:

1. The findings and recommendations made by Magistrate Judge Ferraro

in his October 24, 2011 Report and Recommendation (Doc 15) are

ADOPTED IN WHOLE. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc.1) is

DENIED and this action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

2. The issuance of a certificate of appealability is DENIED.

3. The Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly and close this case. 

DATED this 7th day of February, 2012.

Case 4:10-cv-00500-AWT Document 18 Filed 02/07/12 Page 2 of 2