Ward v. Ryan et al
| Walter Thomas Ward |
| Charles L Ryan and Attorney General of the State of Arizona |
| 4:2018cv00237 |
| May 7, 2018 |
| US District Court for the District of Arizona |
| Tucson Division Office |
| Pinal |
| Leslie A Bowman |
| James A Soto |
| General |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
15
ORDER adopting Report and Recommendations. Magistrate Judge Bowman's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 14 ) is accepted and adopted. The Petition (Doc. 1 ) is denied as time barred. This matter is dismissed with prejudice. The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment in this matter and close this case. The certificate of appealability is denied. Signed by Judge James A Soto on 12/18/2018. (SIB)
|
|
Filing
14
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION re: 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State/2254) filed by Walter Thomas Ward. The Magistrate Judge recommends that the District Court, after its independent review of the record, enter an order DISMISSING the p etition for writ of habeas corpus. (Doc. 1 ) It is time-barred. Any party may serve and file written objections 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 10/15/2018. (SIB)
|
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
