Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-3_02-cr-01072/USCOURTS-azd-3_02-cr-01072-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Douglas DeBruin
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, ) CR 02-1072-PCT-EHC

 ) CV 04-2194-PCT-EHC (ECV)

 Plaintiff/Respondent. ) 

 )

vs. ) ORDER

 ) 

DOUGLAS DEBRUIN, ) 

 )

 Movant/Petitioner. )

_____________________________)

Douglas Debruin, Petitioner, filed a Motion to Vacate, Set

Aside, or Correct Sentence by a Person in Federal Custody

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. (Dkt. 80). Respondent filed a

Response in Opposition to Motion to Vacate. (Dkt. 87).

Magistrate Judge Edward C. Voss filed a Report and

Recommendation. (Dkt. 104). Petitioner filed Motion to Oppose

Courts Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 105) and a Correction.

(Dkt. 107). The Court construes the Motion to Oppose as an

Objection.

Also pending before the Court is Petitioner's Notice of Appeal

from Magistrate Judge Voss' Order of Nov. 17, 2005 denying leave

to amend issued Nov. 17, 2005. The Notice of Appeal states that

"An interlocutory appeal shall be filed in the Ninth Circuit

Court of Appeals." (Dkt. 106). The Court construes the Notice of

Case 3:02-cr-01072-SRB Document 108 Filed 02/06/06 Page 1 of 3
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 -

Appeal as a Motion for an order certifying appealability

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b). (Dkt. 106). 

STANDARD OF REVIEW

A district court judge reviews de novo the Report and

Recommendation of a Magistrate Judge. See 28 U.S.C. §

636(b)(1)(C).

This Court having reviewed the record de novo, including the

Objections filed by Petitioner, adopts in full the Report and

Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Dkt. 104) and

incorporates the same as a part of this Order.

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED adopting the Report and Recommendation

of the Magistrate Judge. (Dkt. 104).

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying Petitioner’s Motion to Vacate,

Set Aside, or Correct Sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255.

(Dkt. 80).

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying Petitioner's Notice of Appeal

from the Order issued Nov. 17, 2005, construed as a Motion for an

Order pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1292(b). (Dkt. 106).

DATED this 2nd day of February, 2006.

Case 3:02-cr-01072-SRB Document 108 Filed 02/06/06 Page 2 of 3
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

- 3 -

Case 3:02-cr-01072-SRB Document 108 Filed 02/06/06 Page 3 of 3