Landeros v. Shinn

Opinion

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

9 Jesus Landeros, No. CV-17-00182-TUC-RCC

10 Petitioner, ORDER

11 v.

12 Charles L Ryan, et al.,

13 Respondents. 14 15 On July 30, 2020, Magistrate Judge Bruce G. Macdonald issued a Report and 16 Recommendation (“R&R”) in which he recommended the Court dismiss Petitioner Jesus 17 Landeros’ Petition Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for a Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person 18 in State Custody (Non-Death Penalty). (Doc. 27.) The R&R notified the parties they had 19 fourteen (14) days from the date of the R&R to file any objections. No objections have 20 been filed. 21 If neither party objects to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, the 22 District Court is not required to review the magistrate judge’s decision under any 23 specified standard of review. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985). However, the 24 statute for review of a magistrate judge’s recommendation “does not preclude further 25 review by the district judge, sua sponte or at the request of a party, under a de novo or 26 any other standard.” Thomas, 474 U.S. at 154. 27 The Court has reviewed and considered the Petition (Docs. 1, 13-1), Judge 28 Macdonald’s screening order (Doc. 13), the Government’s response (Docs. 24-26), and || the R&R (Doc. 27). The Court finds the R&R well-reasoned and agrees with Judge Macdonald’s conclusions. 3 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED the R&R is ADOPTED and Petitioner Jesus Landeros’ Petition Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for a Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person 5|| in State Custody (Non-Death Penalty) is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. (Doc. 27.) || The Clerk of Court shall docket accordingly and close the case file in this matter. 7 Dated this 24th day of September, 2020. 8 9 10 (7 Dp ll f Honorable Raner C. Collins 12 Senior United States District Judge 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

_2-