Stewart v. Ryan et al

Stewart v. Ryan et al

Case Number:	2:2018cv04961
Filed:	September 3, 2019
Court:	US District Court for the District of Arizona
Office:	Phoenix Division Office
Nature of Suit:	Prisoner: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
September 24, 2019	Filing 26 ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 25 - IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying and dismissing with prejudice the Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 14 ). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED pursuant to Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing S ection 2254 Cases, in the event Petitioner files an appeal, the Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability because reasonable jurists would not find the Court's procedural ruling debatable. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED directing the Clerk of Court to terminate this action and enter judgment accordingly. (See document for further details). Signed by Chief Judge G Murray Snow on 9/24/19. (LAD)
September 3, 2019	Filing 25 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION recommending that 14 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (doc. 14 ) be DENIED and DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. FURTHER RECOMMENDED that a Certificate of Appealability and leave to procee d in forma pauperis on appeal be DENIED because the dismissal of the Petition is justified by a plain procedural bar and reasonable jurists would not find the ruling debatable, and because Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denia l of a constitutional right. This recommendation is not an order that is immediately appealable to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Any notice of appeal pursuant to Rule 4(a) (1), Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, should not be filed until entry of the district court's judgment. See document for complete details. Signed by Magistrate Judge John Z Boyle on 9/3/19. (EJA)

Date Filed

Document Text

September 24, 2019

Filing 26 ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 25 - IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying and dismissing with prejudice the Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 14 ). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED pursuant to Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing S ection 2254 Cases, in the event Petitioner files an appeal, the Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability because reasonable jurists would not find the Court's procedural ruling debatable. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED directing the Clerk of Court to terminate this action and enter judgment accordingly. (See document for further details). Signed by Chief Judge G Murray Snow on 9/24/19. (LAD)

September 3, 2019

Filing 25 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION recommending that 14 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (doc. 14 ) be DENIED and DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. FURTHER RECOMMENDED that a Certificate of Appealability and leave to procee d in forma pauperis on appeal be DENIED because the dismissal of the Petition is justified by a plain procedural bar and reasonable jurists would not find the ruling debatable, and because Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denia l of a constitutional right. This recommendation is not an order that is immediately appealable to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Any notice of appeal pursuant to Rule 4(a) (1), Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, should not be filed until entry of the district court's judgment. See document for complete details. Signed by Magistrate Judge John Z Boyle on 9/3/19. (EJA)

Access additional case information on PACER

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

Search for this case: Stewart v. Ryan et al
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]

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?