From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cannon v. Ryan

United States District Court, D. Arizona
Sep 8, 2010
No. CV-09-01817-PHX-ROS (D. Ariz. Sep. 8, 2010)

Opinion

No. CV-09-01817-PHX-ROS.

September 8, 2010


ORDER


Pending before the Court is Magistrate Judge Edward C. Voss' Report and Recommendation, which was filed on July 28, 2010. (Doc. 15). Magistrate Judge Voss recommends the petition for writ of habeas corpus be denied and dismissed with prejudice, Petitioner has not filed any objections.

A district judge "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." 28 USC § 636(b). Where any party has filed timely objections to the magistrate judge's report and recommendations, the district court's review of the part objected to is to be de novo. Id.; see also United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003); Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d 1219, 1226 (D. Ariz. 2003) ("Following Reyna-Tapia, this Court concludes that de novo review of factual and legal issues is required if objections are made, but not otherwise.") (internal quotations and citations omitted).

No objections being made, the Court will adopt the Report and Recommendation in full. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. foll. § 2254, R. 11, the Court must "issue or deny a certificate of appealability when it enters a final order adverse to the applicant." A certificate of appealability will be denied because the applicant passed away and his requested relief is therefore moot.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 15) is ADOPTED and the Petition (Doc. 1) shall be DENIED and DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. FURTHER ORDERED a certificate of appealability IS DENIED.

DATED this 8th day of September, 2010.


Summaries of

Cannon v. Ryan

United States District Court, D. Arizona
Sep 8, 2010
No. CV-09-01817-PHX-ROS (D. Ariz. Sep. 8, 2010)
Case details for

Cannon v. Ryan

Case Details

Full title:Kenneth W. Cannon, Petitioner, v. Charles L. Ryan, et al., Respondents

Court:United States District Court, D. Arizona

Date published: Sep 8, 2010

Citations

No. CV-09-01817-PHX-ROS (D. Ariz. Sep. 8, 2010)

Citing Cases

Riebenack v. Rubens

The next ground of appeal is that the court erred in charging, "but whether the contract was made on Sunday…

Conover v. Collins

The inventory bears the date of October 23d 1944. However, the defendant avers that the instrument was…