Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_99-cr-00910/USCOURTS-azd-2_99-cr-00910-3/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Francis Martinez
Defendant
United States of America
Plaintiff

Document Text:

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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

United States of America, 

Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

Francis Martinez, 

Defendant-Movant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CIV 04-1646-PHX-RGS (ECV)

CR 99-910-PHX-RGS

ORDER

Pending before the Court is Movant's Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Sentence

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The matter was referred to Magistrate Judge Edward C. Voss

for Report and Recommendation. On January 11, 2006, the Magistrate Judge filed his Report

and Recommendation with this Court. To date, no Objections have been filed.

STANDARD OF REVIEW

When reviewing a Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, this Court "must

make a de novo determination of those portions of the report ... to which objection is made,"

and "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations

made by the magistrate." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); see Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391,

1394 (9th Cir. 1991). Failure to object to a Magistrate Judge's recommendation relieves the

Court of conducting de novo review of the Magistrate Judge's factual findings. See Orand

v. United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979) (citing Campbell v. United States Dist.

Court, 501 F.2d 196, 206 (9th Cir. 1974)); see also United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d

Case 2:99-cr-00910-RGS Document 58 Filed 01/24/07 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 -

1114,1121 (9th Cir. 2003) ("The statute makes it clear that the district judge must review the

magistrate judge's findings and recommendations de novo if objection is made, but not

otherwise."). A failure to object to a magistrate judge's conclusion "is a factor to be weighed

in considering the propriety of finding waiver of an issue on appeal." Turner v. Duncan, 158

F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); see Baxter, 923 F.2d at 1394.

DISCUSSION

Having reviewed the Amended Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge,

and no objections having been made by Movant thereto, the Court hereby incorporates and

adopts the Magistrate Judge's Amended Report and Recommendation. 

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

For the reasons set forth, 

IT IS ORDERED that the Court adopts the Amended Report and Recommendation

of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. #57);

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Movant's Motion to Amend and Supplement

(Doc. #44) is DENIED;

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. #46) is

GRANTED;

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Movant's Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct

Sentence (Doc. #38) is DENIED, terminating this case.

DATED this 22nd day of January, 2007.

Case 2:99-cr-00910-RGS Document 58 Filed 01/24/07 Page 2 of 2