Source: http://ca.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20070312_0000232.SCA.htm/qx
Timestamp: 2017-03-26 17:33:17
Document Index: 367851862

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 2254', '§ 2254', '§ 636', '§ 636', '§ 636', '§ 2254']

| Aquino v. Tilton
Aquino v. Tilton
FRANCISCO RAMOS AQUINO, PETITIONER,v.JAMES E. TILTON,*FN1 SECRETARY, RESPONDENT.
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Petitioner Francisco Ramos Aquino, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Cathy Ann Bencivengo for a report and recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Civil Local Rule 72.3. On January 22, 2007, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation, recommending the petition be denied.
A district judge "may accept, reject, or modify the recommended decision" on a dispositive matter prepared by a magistrate judge proceeding without the consent of the parties for all purposes. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); see 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). "The court shall make a de determination of those portions of the [report and recommendation] to which objection is made." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Section 636(b)(1) does not require some lesser review by the district court when no objections are filed. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149-50 (1985). 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." United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (emphasis in the original); see Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d 1219, 1225-26 & n.5 (D. Ariz. 2003) (applying Reyna-Tapia to habeas review). In the absence of any objections, the court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation. Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 is DENIED.