Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_04-cr-00345/USCOURTS-azd-2_04-cr-00345-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Gregorio Miranda-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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

United States of America, 

Plaintiff/Respondent, 

vs.

Gregorio Miranda-Martinez, 

Defendant/Movant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CR 04-0345-PHX-EHC

 CV 06-0920-PHX-EHC

ORDER

Defendant/Movant (“Movant”) has filed a Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct

Sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Criminal Dkt. 25). Movant was charged in an indictment

with three counts as follows: felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§

922(g)(1), 924(a)(2) (Count 1); illegal alien in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18

U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(5), 924(a)(2)(Count 2); and re-entry after deportation, in violation of 8

U.S.C. §§ 1326(a), (b)(2)(Count 3) (Criminal Dkt. 1). On June 28, 2004, Movant pleaded

guilty to Count 3, with Counts 1 and 2 to be dismissed at sentencing, pursuant to the terms

of a plea agreement (Criminal Dkt. 6, 12). On October 22, 2004, Movant was sentenced on

Count 3 to 87 months imprisonment, to be followed by 36 months of supervised release, and

Counts 1 and 2 were dismissed (Criminal Dkt. 11). Movant’s conviction and sentence were

affirmed on appeal (Criminal Dkt. 24). 

Movant filed his § 2255 motion on March 30, 2006. (Criminal Dkt. 25). Movant

contends that his criminal history was improperly calculated; that his plea was not consistent

Case 2:04-cr-00345-EHC Document 34 Filed 01/09/08 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 -

with his sentence; and that defense counsel was ineffective regarding the terms of Movant’s

plea and sentence. The matter was referred to Magistrate Judge Bernardo P. Velasco who has

issued a Report and Recommendation dated May 11, 2007 recommending that the § 2255

Motion be denied. (Criminal Dkt. 33). The Magistrate Judge found that Movant lawfully

waived the right to seek post-conviction relief under the terms of his plea agreement.

Movant has not filed an Objection or otherwise responded to the Report and

Recommendation. 

 Standard of Review

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

Recommendation to which Movant has filed an 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). 

Discussion

The Court adopts in full the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge and

incorporates the same as a part of this Order. 

Accordingly,

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

(Criminal Dkt. 33) is adopted in full.

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

Sentence (Criminal Dkt. 25) is denied.

DATED this 8th day of January, 2008.

Case 2:04-cr-00345-EHC Document 34 Filed 01/09/08 Page 2 of 2