Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_12-cv-01781/USCOURTS-azd-2_12-cv-01781-1/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 

NOT FOR PUBLICATION 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Matthew Ronald Creamer, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

Charles L Ryan, et al., 

Respondents.

No. CV-12-01781-PHX-SRB

ORDER 

 Petitioner filed his Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 

2254 on August 20, 2012 raising six grounds for relief: 1) the trial court’s denial of his 

motion to change counsel violated his Sixth Amendment Right; 2) he was denied his right to 

access the courts and his right to due process was violated because he was not personally 

interviewed by the author of the presentence report; 3) the method used by the state trial 

court to call a jury panel violated his constitutional rights; 4) trial counsel was ineffective 

because he did not move to suppress the admission of evidence; 5) trial counsel was 

ineffective because he did not challenge the state’s “failure” to prove the fair-market value 

of the victim’s stolen property; and 6) trial counsel was ineffective because he “performed 

deficiently at the sentencing phase.” Respondents filed their Response to Petitioner’s 

Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus on February 25, 2013. No reply was filed. On January 

3, 2014, the Magistrate Judge issued his Report and Recommendation recommending that 

the petition be denied and dismissed with prejudice. 

Case 2:12-cv-01781-JJT Document 32 Filed 01/30/14 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 

 In his Report and Recommendation the Magistrate Judge advised the parties that 

they had 14 days from the date of service of a copy of the Report and Recommendation 

within which to file specific written objections with the Court. The time to file such 

objections has expired and no objections to the Report and Recommendation have been 

filed. 

 The Court finds itself in agreement with the Report and Recommendation of the 

Magistrate Judge. 

 IT IS ORDERED adopting the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate 

Judge as the order of this Court. 

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is denied 

and dismissed with prejudice. 

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying any Certificate of Appealability and leave 

to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal because Petitioner has not made a substantial 

showing of the denial of a constitutional right. 

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED directing the Clerk to enter judgment accordingly. 

 Dated this 30th day of January, 2014. 

 

Case 2:12-cv-01781-JJT Document 32 Filed 01/30/14 Page 2 of 2