Johnson 262867 v. Shinn

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

9 Robert Edward Johnson, No. CV-18-02864-PHX-SHR

10 Petitioner, ORDER

11 v.

12 Charles L Ryan, et al.,

13 Respondents. 14 15 On August 17, 2020, Magistrate Judge D. Thomas Ferraro issued a Report and 16 Recommendation (“R&R”) in which he recommended the Court dismiss Petitioner 17 Robert Edward Johnson’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 18 2254 (“Petition”). (Doc. 17.) The R&R notified the parties they had fourteen (14) days 19 from the date of the R&R to file any objections. No objections have been filed. 20 If neither party objects to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, the 21 District Court is not required to review the magistrate judge’s decision under any 22 specified standard of review. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985). However, the 23 statute for review of a magistrate judge’s recommendation “does not preclude further 24 review by the district judge, sua sponte or at the request of a party, under a de novo or 25 any other standard.” Thomas, 474 U.S. at 154. 26 The Court has reviewed the Petition (Doc. 1), the Respondent’s Response (Doc. 27 16), and Judge Ferraro’s R&R (Doc. 17). The Court finds the R&R well-reasoned and 28 agrees with Judge Ferraro’s conclusions. 1 IT IS ORDERED the R&R is ADOPTED (Doc. 17) and Robert Edward Johnson 2|| Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 is DENIED and DISMISSED (Doc. 1). The Clerk of Court shall docket accordingly and close the case 4|| file in this matter. 5 Dated this 22nd day of October, 2020. 6 7 9 10 ( : Honorable Scott H. Rash __

_/ United States District Judge 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

_2-