Opinion
No. CV-16-00054-TUC-JGZ
04-25-2017
Jeffrey A Krassow, Petitioner, v. State of Arizona, et al., Respondents.
ORDER
Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation issued by United States Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Rateau that recommends denying Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (Doc. 21.)
A review of the record reflects that the parties have not filed any objections to the Report and Recommendation and the time to file objections has expired. As such, the Court will not consider any objections or new evidence.
The Court has reviewed the record and concludes that Magistrate Judge Rateau's recommendations are not clearly erroneous. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72; Johnson v. Zema Systems Corp., 170 F.3d 734, 739 (7th Cir. 1999); see also Conley v. Crabtree, 14 F.Supp.2d 1203, 1204 (D. Or. 1998).
Before Petitioner can appeal this Court's judgment, a certificate of appealability must issue. See 28 U.S.C. §2253(c) and Fed. R. App. P. 22(b)(1). Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 22(b) requires the district court that rendered a judgment denying the petition made pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §2254 to "either issue a certificate of appealability or state why a certificate should not issue." Additionally, 28 U.S.C. §2253(c)(2) provides that a certificate may issue "only if the applicant has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." In the certificate, the court must indicate which specific issues satisfy this showing. See 28 U.S.C. §2253(c)(3). A substantial showing is made when the resolution of an issue of appeal is debatable among reasonable jurists, if courts could resolve the issues differently, or if the issue deserves further proceedings. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484-85 (2000). Upon review of the record in light of the standards for granting a certificate of appealability, the Court concludes that a certificate shall not issue as the resolution of the petition is not debatable among reasonable jurists and does not deserve further proceedings.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows: 1. Magistrate Judge Rateau's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 21) is accepted and adopted; 2. Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) is DENIED; 3. This case is dismissed with prejudice. The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly.
Dated this 25th day of April, 2017.
/s/_________
Honorable Jennifer G. Zipps
United States District Judge