Summary
stating that a habeas claim exhausted through a petition for special action must be presented to the Arizona Supreme Court
Summary of this case from Jenkins v. RyanOpinion
No. CV 05-3852 PHX NVW (JI).
June 28, 2006
ORDER
Before the court are Petitioner's amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (doc. # 7), United States Magistrate Judge Jay R. Irwin's Report and Recommendation (doc. # 16), and Petitioner's Objection to Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (doc. # 17).
The court has considered Petitioner's objections and reviewed the Report and Recommendation de novo. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (stating that the court must make a de novo determination of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which specific objections are made). The court agrees with the magistrate judge's determinations, accepts his recommended decision within the meaning of Rule 72(b), Fed.R.Civ.P., and overrules Petitioner's objections. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (stating that the district court "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate").
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Irwin (doc. # 16) is accepted.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner's amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (doc. # 7) is dismissed with prejudice.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly and terminate this action.