Cavazos v. Schriro

Full title: Adam P. Cavazos, Petitioner, v. Dora B. Schriro, et al., Respondents

Court: United States District Court, D. Arizona

Date published: Mar 30, 2009

CV 08-0246-PHX-PGR (LOA) (D. Ariz. Mar. 30, 2009)

Opinion

CV 08-0246-PHX-PGR (LOA).

March 30, 2009

ORDER

PAUL ROSENBLATT, District Judge

Currently before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Anderson (Doc. 17) based on Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) and his Motion for a New Trial (Doc. 11.) Having reviewed the Petition, Motion for a New Trial, Report and Recommendation, and the Petitioner's Objections to the Report and Recommendation, and in light of the Court's finding that Petitioner's Objections lack merit,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 17) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED by the Court.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) is DENIED and DISMISSED with prejudice.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner's Motion for a New Trial (Doc. 11.) is DENIED. ¹

1 In addition to the substantive reasons for adopting the Report and Recommendations, a "Motion for a New Trial" is not the proper vehicle for Petitioner to challenge his state-court conviction and sentence in this Court. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 2254, 2241. The aforementioned motion is also duplicative of the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and thus a denial is warranted on that basis as well.