Jermain e Lamar Rutledge v. Ryan Thornell, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of Arizona adopted the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation in a habeas corpus action under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The court overruled the petitioner’s objections, denied his motion to stay and renewed request for appointment of counsel, and dismissed the amended petition with prejudice. The court also denied a certificate of appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal.

Holdings

1. A district judge reviews de novo the portions of a magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation that are properly and specifically objected to, while portions lacking specific objections need not be reviewed.
2. A party is not entitled as of right to de novo review of evidence or arguments raised for the first time in objections to a Report and Recommendation; whether to consider them is discretionary.
3. The Report and Recommendation was adopted in full; the motion to stay and amended § 2254 petition were denied, and the action was dismissed with prejudice.
4. A certificate of appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal were denied.

Questions Presented

1. What standard of review governs the district court's consideration of objections to the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation?
2. Whether the Report and Recommendation should be adopted and the amended § 2254 petition denied.
3. Whether proceedings should be stayed pending exhaustion of state-court remedies.
4. Whether Rutledge should receive appointed counsel, a certificate of appealability, or leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal.

Disposition

dismissed