Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-01221/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-01221-0/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

Peter Mohammed Sharma, 

Petitioner, 

vs.

Dora B. Schriro, et al., 

Respondents. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-08-1221-PHX-ROS

ORDER

Pending before the Court is Magistrate Judge Hector C. Estrada’s Report and

Recommendation, which was filed on September 22, 2009. (Doc. 18) Magistrate Judge

Estrada recommends the petition for writ of habeas corpus be denied in part and the

remainder be dismissed. Petitioner has not filed any objections. 

A district judge “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or

recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 USC § 636(b). Where any party has

filed timely objections to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendations, the district

court’s review of the part objected to is to be de novo. Id.; see also United States v. ReynaTapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003); Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d 1219,

1226 (D. Ariz. 2003) (“Following Reyna-Tapia, this Court concludes that de novo review of

factual and legal issues is required if objections are made, but not otherwise.”) (internal

quotations and citations omitted).

Case 2:08-cv-01221-ROS Document 19 Filed 12/17/09 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 -

No objections being made, the Court will adopt the Report and Recommendation in

full. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. foll. § 2254, R. 11, the Court must “issue or deny a certificate of

appealability when it enters a final order adverse to the applicant.” A certificate of

appealability will be denied because the applicant has not made a substantial showing of the

denial of a constitutional right as required by 28 U.S.C.A § 2253(c)(2)

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED the Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED and the

Petition (Doc. 1) shall be DENIED in part and the remainder DISMISSED.

FURTHER ORDERED a certificate of appealability IS DENIED.

DATED this 16th day of December, 2009.

Case 2:08-cv-01221-ROS Document 19 Filed 12/17/09 Page 2 of 2