Source: https://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/arizona/azdce/2:2011cv01316/626314/33
Timestamp: 2016-10-23 08:01:40
Document Index: 586146593

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 2254', '§ 2253', '§ 2254', '§ 636', '§ 2254', '§ 2253']

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 32 : IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the portion of Petitioner's Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U for Foster v. Ryan et al :: Justia Dockets & Filings Log In
Foster v. Ryan et al
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 32 : IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the portion of Petitioner's Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 asserting a claim under Anders v. California, 368 U.S. 738 (1967 ) is DENIED WITH PREJUDICE ON THE MERITS. (Doc. 7.) The remainder of Petitioner's Amended Petition is procedurally barred and DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. (Doc. 7.) The Clerk of Court shall terminate this action accordingly. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED DENYING, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (c)(2), issuance of a certificate of appealability on any of Petitioner's claims based on the reasons provided in the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge James F. Metcalf. (Doc. 32.) IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall send a copy of this Order to all parties as well as to Magistrate Judge James F. Metcalf. Signed by Senior Judge Stephen M McNamee on 7/11/12. (LAD)
Roosevelt Foster, Jr.,
No. CV 11-1316-PHX-SMM (JFM)
On May 8, 2012, Magistrate Judge James F. Metcalf filed a Report and Recommendation
advising this Court that Petitioner’s Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 2254 (the “Amended Petition”) (Doc. 7) should be denied and dismissed with
prejudice. (Doc 32.) To date, Petitioner has not filed objections to Judge Metcalf’s Report and
“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 judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); see also Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391,
1394 (9th Cir. 1991) (citing Britt v. Simi Valley Unified Sch. Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir.
By failing to object to a Report and Recommendation, a party waives his right to
challenge the Magistrate’s factual findings, but not necessarily the Magistrate’s legal
conclusions. Baxter, 923 F.2d at 1394; see also Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir.
1998) (failure to object to Magistrate’s legal conclusion “is a factor to be weighed in
considering the propriety of finding waiver of an issue on appeal”); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d
1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 1991) (citing McCall v. Andrus, 628 F.2d 1185, 1187 (9th Cir. 1980)).
Having reviewed Petitioner’s Petition and, thereafter, having reviewed the Magistrate
Judge’s Report and Recommendation and the record de novo, and no objections having been
made by Petitioner thereto, the Court hereby incorporates and adopts the Magistrate Judge’s
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Court adopts the Report and Recommendation of
Magistrate Judge James F. Metcalf. (Doc. 32.)
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the portion of Petitioner’s Amended Petition for
Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 asserting a claim under Anders v.
California, 368 U.S. 738 (1967) is DENIED WITH PREJUDICE ON THE MERITS. (Doc.
7.) The remainder of Petitioner’s Amended Petition is procedurally barred and DISMISSED
WITH PREJUDICE. (Doc. 7.) The Clerk of Court shall terminate this action accordingly.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED DENYING, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2),
issuance of a certificate of appealability on any of Petitioner’s claims based on the reasons
provided in the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge James F. Metcalf. (Doc. 32.)
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall send a copy of this Order
to all parties as well as to Magistrate Judge James F. Metcalf.