RYES v. SCHRIRO

Full title: Edilberto Ryes, Petitioner, v. Dora B. Schriro, et al. Respondents

Court: United States District Court, D. Arizona

Date published: Jun 7, 2006

No. CV05-1716-PHX-SRB (D. Ariz. Jun. 7, 2006)

Opinion

No. CV05-1716-PHX-SRB.

June 7, 2006

ORDER

SUSAN BOLTON, District Judge

Petitioner filed his Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 on June 8, 2005. Petitioner alleges the denial of various constitutional rights from I) trial counsel's alleged failure to communicate the plea offers; II) alleged inexperience of the trial judge and his suppression of exculpatory evidence; III) a claimed conspiracy between the judge, the prosecutor and defense counsel to prevent Petitioner from confronting the victim prior to trial and; IV) a claimed conspiracy to not maintain records of the communication of the plea agreement. On December 29, 2005, Respondents filed their answer to Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. No reply was filed. On April 28, 2006, the Magistrate Judge issued his Report and Recommendation recommending that Ground II, III, and IV of the petition be dismissed with prejudice because Petitioner never fairly presented to them the state appellate courts and thus failed to exhaust state remedies on these claims. The Magistrate Judge recommended that Ground I of the petition be denied because Petitioner's factual claim that his plea offers were not communicated to him by his lawyer was rejected by the state court and there was substantial evidence to support the state court's finding that the plea offers were communicated.

In his Report and Recommendation the Magistrate Judge advised the parties that they had 10 days from the date of service of a copy of the Report and Recommendation within which to file specific written objections with the Court. The time to file such objections has long since expired and no objections to the Report and Recommendation have been filed.

The Court finds itself in agreement with the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge.

IT IS ORDERED adopting the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge as the order of this Court.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is denied as to Ground I and dismissed with prejudice as to Grounds II, III, and IV.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED directing the Clerk to enter judgment accordingly.