Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_09-cv-01611/USCOURTS-azd-2_09-cv-01611-1/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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Theodor R. Bendig,

 Petitioner,

vs.

Charles L. Ryan, et al.,

 Respondents.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-09-1611-PHX-PGR (ECV)

 

 ORDER

Having reviewed de novo the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate

Judge Voss notwithstanding that no party has filed any objection to the Report

and Recommendation, the Court finds that the Magistrate Judge correctly

determined that the petitioner’s habeas corpus petition, filed pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 2254, should be dismissed as time-barred because it was filed some

nine years after the expiration of the AEDPA’s one-year statute of limitations and

the petitioner has made no showing that the limitations period should be equitably

tolled. 

The Court further finds that the petitioner is not entitled to the issuance of a 

certificate of appealability pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254(c)(2) because the

dismissal of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus is justified by a plain

Case 2:09-cv-01611-PGR Document 19 Filed 08/31/10 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

- 2 -

procedural bar and jurists of reason would not find the procedural ruling

debatable, and that the petitioner is not entitled to appeal in forma pauperis.

pursuant to Fed.R.App.P. 24(a)(3)(A) because any such appeal would not be

taken in good faith given the Court’s stated reason for the dismissal of his

petition.

Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation

(Doc. 18) is accepted and adopted by the Court

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the petitioner’s Petition Under 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2254 for a Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody is denied and

that this action is dismissed with prejudice.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that no certificate of apppealability shall issue

and that the petitioner is not authorized to appeal in forma pauperis.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall enter

judgment accordingly.

DATED this 31st day of August, 2010.

Case 2:09-cv-01611-PGR Document 19 Filed 08/31/10 Page 2 of 2