Skip to content.
About GPO   |   Newsroom/Media   |   Congressional Relations   |   Inspector General   |   Careers   |   Contact   |   askGPO   |   Help  
 

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)
 

14-1665 - Pittman v. Ryan et al


Download Files

Metadata

Document in Context
14-1665 - Pittman v. Ryan et al
December 28, 2015
PDF | More
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: IT IS THEREFORE RECOMMENDED that the Second Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 13) be GRANTED as to Ground One (amending Petitioner's sentence in CR 2012-147441-001 SE (Aggravated Assault, a Class 3 Dangerous Felony) to 290 days of imprisonment with 290 days of credit for time served); that Ground Two of the Second Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 13) be DENIED and DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; that the Court order the State of Arizona to transfer Petitioner to federal custody for Petitioner to begin serving his five-year sentence in 12-CR-20-DLB-2 (Eastern District of Kentucky); that the Court retain jurisdiction over this matter for six months, absent further request of the parties; that a Certificate of Appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal be DENIED because Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right with regard to Ground Two. See document for further details. Signed by Magistrate Judge John Z Boyle on 12/28/2015. (REK)
January 25, 2016
PDF | More
ORDER: Magistrate Judge Boyle's R&R (Doc. 18) is accepted. Petitioner's Second Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 13) is granted as to Ground One and denied as to Ground Two and dismissed with prejudice. The State of Arizona is to transfer Petitioner to federal custody for Petitioner to begin serving his five-year sentence in CR-12-20-DLB-2 (Eastern District of Kentucky). The Court shall retain jurisdiction over this matter for six months, absent further request of the parties. The Clerk of Court shall terminate this action and enter judgment accordingly. Pursuant to Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, in the event Petitioner files an appeal, the Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability because reasonable jurists would not find the Court's procedural ruling debatable. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). Signed by Judge G Murray Snow on 1/25/2016. (REK)