From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jones v. Schriro

United States District Court, D. Arizona
Jun 27, 2006
No. CV 05-3720-PHX-JAT (D. Ariz. Jun. 27, 2006)

Summary

In Jones, petitioner admitted either in the written plea agreement, at the change of plea hearing, or at sentencing to three different aggravating factors.

Summary of this case from Van Norman v. Schriro

Opinion

No. CV 05-3720-PHX-JAT.

June 27, 2006


ORDER


Pending before the Court is Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus ("Petition") (Doc. #1). On May 24, 2006, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation ("RR") (Doc. #11) recommending that the Petition be denied.

Neither party has filed objections to the RR. Accordingly, the Court hereby accepts the RR. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985) (finding that district courts are not required to conduct "any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection" (emphasis added)); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) ( en banc) ("statute makes it clear that the district judge must review the magistrate judge's findings and recommendations de novo if objection is made, but not otherwise" (emphasis in original)); see also Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F.Supp.2d 1219, 1226 (D. Ariz. 2003). Accordingly,

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Doc. #11) is ACCEPTED; IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. #1) is DENIED; and

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE and the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly.


Summaries of

Jones v. Schriro

United States District Court, D. Arizona
Jun 27, 2006
No. CV 05-3720-PHX-JAT (D. Ariz. Jun. 27, 2006)

In Jones, petitioner admitted either in the written plea agreement, at the change of plea hearing, or at sentencing to three different aggravating factors.

Summary of this case from Van Norman v. Schriro

In Jones, the court found no Blakely violation where petitioner's aggravated sentence was based, in part, on a prior conviction.

Summary of this case from Van Norman v. Schriro

In Jones, petitioner admitted either in the written plea agreement, at the change of plea hearing, or at sentencing to three different aggravating factors.

Summary of this case from Van Norman v. Schriro

In Jones, the court found no Blakely violation where petitioner's aggravated sentence was based, in part, on a prior conviction.

Summary of this case from Van Norman v. Schriro
Case details for

Jones v. Schriro

Case Details

Full title:Jerome Jones, Plaintiff, v. Dora B. Schriro; et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, D. Arizona

Date published: Jun 27, 2006

Citations

No. CV 05-3720-PHX-JAT (D. Ariz. Jun. 27, 2006)

Citing Cases

Van Norman v. Schriro

The R R notes that courts in this Circuit have consistently held that a prior conviction alone is sufficient…

Van Norman v. Schriro

Applying Blakely, courts within the Ninth Circuit have held a federal habeas petitioner's "prior conviction…