Bonin v. Ryan et al
||Steven Anthony Bonin
||Charles L Ryan and Attorney General of the State of Arizona
||July 15, 2013
||US District Court for the District of Arizona
||Tucson Division Office
||Leslie A Bowman (PS)
||Cindy K Jorgenson
|Nature of Suit:
||Prisoner: Habeas Corpus (General)
|Cause of Action:
||28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
|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:
|May 4, 2015
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: It is Ordered 22 Report and Recommendation is accepted and adopted, except to the extent that it states that Martinez v. Ryan, 132 S. Ct. 1309 (2012), is inapplicable in situations where a prisoner is not appointed postconviction counsel. Mr. Bonin's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1 ) is denied. This case is dismissed with prejudice. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly and close this case. The Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability. Signed by Judge Rosemary Marquez on 5/4/2015. (MFR)
|September 16, 2014
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: The Magistrate Judge recommends that the District Court, after its independent review of the record, enter an order Denying the petition for writ of habeas corpus. (Doc. 1 ). Any party may serve and file written objecti ons within 14 days of being served with a copy of this report and recommendation. If objections are not timely filed, they may be deemed waived. The Local Rules permit a response to an objection. They do not permit a reply to a response. Signed by Magistrate Judge Leslie A Bowman on 9/16/2014. (MFR)
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?