Rodriguez v. Ryan et al
||Vincent Edward Rodriguez
||Charles L Ryan and Attorney General of the State of Arizona
||July 28, 2015
||US District Court for the District of Arizona
||Phoenix Division Office
||Susan R Bolton
||Michelle H Burns
|Nature of Suit:
|Cause of Action:
||28 U.S.C. § 2254
|Jury Demanded By:
Access additional case information on PACER
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|January 13, 2016
ORDER: IT IS ORDERED overruling Petitioner's Objections to the Report andRecommendation of the Magistrate Judge; adopting the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge as the Order of this Court; the Petition under 28 U.SC. § 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody is denied and dismissed with prejudice; denying a Certificate of Appealability because dismissal of the petition is justified by a plain procedural bar and jurists of reason would not find the procedural ruling debatable. See document for further details. Signed by Judge Susan R Bolton on 1/13/2016. (REK)
|November 30, 2015
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: IT IS THEREFORE RECOMMENDED that Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 1 ) be DENIED and DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that a Certificate of Ap pealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal be DENIED because the dismissal of the Petition is justified by a plain procedural bar and jurists of reason would not find the procedural ruling debatable. See document for further details. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michelle H Burns on 11/30/2015. (REK)
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system.
A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Arizona District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?