Marrero v. Shinn

• Court: District Court, D. Arizona
• Decided: May 3, 2023
• Docket: 4:20-cv-00503
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

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

9 Mark Angel Marrero, Jr., No. CV-20-00503-TUC-DCB

10 Petitioner, ORDER

11 v.

12 David Shinn, et al.,

13 Respondents. 14 15 This matter was referred to Magistrate Judge Bruce G. Macdonald, pursuant to 16 Rules of Practice for the United States District Court, District of Arizona (Local Rules), 17 Rule (Civil) 72.1(a). He issued a Report and Recommendation (R&R) on March 7, 2023. 18 (Doc. 12). He recommends that this Court dismiss the Petition because Petitioner’s claims 19 are procedurally defaulted without excuse and/or not cognizable in federal habeas. 20 STANDARD OF REVIEW 21 The duties of the district court, when reviewing a R&R by a Magistrate Judge, are 22 set forth in Rule 72 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The 23 district court may “accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or 24 recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b), 28 U.S.C. § 25 636(b)(1). When the parties object to a R&R, “‘[a] judge of the [district] court shall make 26 a de novo determination of those portions of the [R&R] to which objection is made.’” 27 Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149-50 (1985) (quoting 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)). When no 28 objections are filed, the district court does not need to review the R&R de novo. Wang v. 1 Masaitis, 416 F.3d 992, 1000 n. 13 (9th Cir.2005); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 2 1114, 1121-22 (9th Cir.2003) (en banc). 3 The parties were sent copies of the R&R and instructed they had 14 days to file 4 written objections. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), see also, Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 72 5 (party objecting to the recommended disposition has fourteen (14) days to file specific, 6 written objections). To date, no objections have been filed. 7 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 8 The Honorable Bruce G. Macdonald, United States Magistrate Judge, considered 9 two issues on appeal: whether the trial court erred by precluding some of his third-party 10 culpability evidence and whether the State withheld impeachment evidence in violation of 11 Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963). 12 The Magistrate Judge concluded that the Petitioner failed to present the first issue 13 to the state courts as a federal claim. Any attempt to return to state court now would be 14 futile in view of Rules 32.2 and 32.4(b), which preclude successive petitions for relief 15 except in a few narrow categories. (R&R (Doc. 12) at 10.) Consequently, this claim is 16 procedurally defaulted. Additionally, federal habeas relief is not available to review 17 questions about the admissibility of evidence. Id. at 10-11 (citations omitted). 18 The Magistrate Judge concluded that the claim that the State withheld impeachment 19 evidence is precluded because the state courts considered this issue and found it 20 procedurally defaulted on independent state grounds; the Arizona Court of Appeals found 21 this claim did not meet the requirements for newly discovered evidence, and he had waived 22 the issue by failing to timely raise it. This procedural default by the state court based on 23 independent state grounds precludes review by this Court. Id. at 11-13. 24 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), this Court makes a de novo determination as to those 25 portions of the R&R to which there are objections. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) ("A judge of the 26 court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified 27 proposed findings and recommendations to which objection is made.") To the extent that 28 no objection has been made, arguments to the contrary have been waived. McCall v. 1 Andrus, 628 F.2d 1185, 1187 (9th Cir. 1980) (failure to object to Magistrate's report waives 2 right to do so on appeal); see also, Advisory Committee Notes to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 (citing 3 Campbell v. United States Dist. Court, 501 F.2d 196, 206 (9th Cir. 1974) (when no timely 4 objection is filed, the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of 5 the record in order to accept the recommendation). 6 While there are no objections and, therefore, review has been waived, the Court 7 nevertheless reviews at a minimum, de novo, the Magistrate Judge’s conclusions of law. 8 Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (citing Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 9 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998) (conclusions of law by a magistrate judge reviewed de novo); 10 Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 1991) (failure to object standing alone will 11 not ordinarily waive question of law but is a factor in considering the propriety of finding 12 waiver)). The Court finds the R&R to be thorough and well-reasoned, without any clear 13 error in law or fact. See United States v. Remsing, 874 F.2d 614, 617-618 (9th Cir. 1989) 14 (citing 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) as providing for district court to reconsider matters 15 delegated to magistrate judge when there is clear error or recommendation is contrary to 16 law). The Court accepts and adopts the R&R as the opinion of the Court, pursuant to 28 17 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). For the reasons stated in the R&R, the Court dismisses the Petition. 18 Accordingly, 19 IT IS ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 12) is adopted as the 20 findings of fact and conclusions of law of the Court. 21 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED. 22 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall enter Judgment 23 accordingly. 24 ///// 25 ///// 26 ///// 27 ///// 28 ///// 1 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that in the event Petitioner files an appeal, the Court 2|| declines to issue a certificate of appealability, pursuant to Rule I1(a) of the Rules || Governing Section 2254 cases because reasonable jurists would not find the Court’s procedural ruling debatable. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). 5 Dated this 3rd day of May, 2023. 6 SS SY ° Honorabje David C. But 10 United States District Judge 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

-_4-