Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-3_09-cv-08214/USCOURTS-azd-3_09-cv-08214-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 510
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Vacate Sentence
Cause of Action: 28:2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence

---

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

United States of America, 

Plaintiff/Respondent, 

vs.

Ruben Andrade-Casales,

Defendant/Movant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 09-8214-PCT-EHC (JRI)

No. CR 06-0346-PCT-EHC

ORDER

On November 30, 2009, Movant filed a Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct

Sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The United States has filed a Response. The matter was

referred to Magistrate Judge Jay R. Irwin who filed a Report and Recommendation on

February 17, 2011 recommending that the Motion be dismissed with prejudice as to Ground

One and denied as to Ground Two (Doc. 11 - CV 09-8214). 

 The district court reviews de novo the portions of the Magistrate Judge's Report and

Recommendation to which there is a filed objection. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C)("a judge of

the court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report, ..., to which

objection is made"); see also United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir.

2003). The district court is not required to review any issue that is not the subject of an

objection. Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d 1219 (D. Ariz. 2003), citing Thomas v.

Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). Movant has not filed an objection to the Report and

Recommendation within the time allowed. 

Case 3:09-cv-08214-EHC Document 14 Filed 04/11/11 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 -

Moreover, it appears that the Motion may be subject to dismissal as moot. In the

underlying criminal case (CR 06-346-PCT-EHC), Movant was convicted of illegal re-entry

after deportation, 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) (Doc. 43). The indictment charged that Movant entered

and was found in the United States on or about February 14, 2006 after having been

previously denied admission, excluded, deported, and removed from the United States at or

near Calexico, California on or about October 29, 1992, and not having obtained the express

consent of the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security to reapply for admission

(Doc. 10). Information in the underlying criminal case shows that Movant had been

previously deported from the United States subsequent to having been convicted of an

aggravated felony or serious criminal offense (Doc. 30-1). On March 14, 2011, Movant

filed a change of address notice in the instant civil case (CV 09-8214) showing his present

address as “Apartado Postal No. 7, cd. Lerdo, Dgo 35150". It appears that Movant has been

released from custody and is presently in the Mexican state of Durango (Doc. 12). Even if

his present § 2255 motion is successful, he would still be unable to legally enter the country

because of his past felony convictions. See Yitchak v. United States, 2007 WL 3254115 *2

(N.D.N.Y. Nov. 2, 2007)(No. 1:05-CV-1388(GLS)). 

The Report and Recommendation will be adopted as the Order of the Court.

Accordingly, 

IT IS ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge

(Doc. 11 - CV 09-8214-PCT-EHC (JRI)) is adopted in full, including the denial of a

Certificate of Appealability. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct

Sentence is dismissed with prejudice as to Ground One and denied as to Ground Two.

DATED this 8th day of April, 2011.

Case 3:09-cv-08214-EHC Document 14 Filed 04/11/11 Page 2 of 2