United States Government Publishing Office
publisher
pbl
distributor
dst
United States
United States District Court District of Arizona
author
aut
Government Organization
text
government publication
eng
USCOURTS
Judicial Publications
judicial
2016-05-04
Administrative Office of the United States Courts
2016-05-02
monographic
deposited
born digital
JU 4.15
https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/USCOURTS-azd-3_14-cv-08047
P0b002ee18f5d945e
DGPO
2016-05-04
2016-05-04
USCOURTS-azd-3_14-cv-08047
machine generated
eng
fdlp
USCOURTS
USCOURTS-azd-3_14-cv-08047
District
azd
9th
Arizona
2040
3:14-cv-08047
Prescott Division
civil
530
Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Eddy #053476 v. Ryan et al
3:14-cv-08047
https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/USCOURTS-azd-3_14-cv-08047
JU 4.15
3:14-cv-08047;14-8047
United States District Court District of Arizona
9th Circuit
Prescott Division
U.S. Courts
author
aut
Attorney General of the State of Arizona
Attorney General of the State of Arizona
Respondent
Bobby Lynn Beason
Beason
Bobby Lynn
Petitioner
Dennis Paul Eddy
Eddy
Dennis Paul
Petitioner
Michael E Gottfried
Gottfried
Michael E
Interested Party
Tom Horne
Horne
Tom
Respondent
Charles L Ryan
Ryan
Charles L
Respondent
USCOURTS
USCOURTS-azd-3_14-cv-08047
District
azd
9th
Arizona
2040
3:14-cv-08047
Prescott Division
civil
530
Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Arizona
Eddy #053476 v. Ryan et al
41, 42.). Signed by Magistrate Judge Bridget S Bade on 8/20/15. (LSP)REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION recommending that the Court dismiss Grounds One, Two, and Three without prejudice to Petitioner seeking authorization from the Ninth Circuit to bring those claims in a successive § 2254 petition, and that the Court deny Petitioner's request to stay this matter (Doc. 46 at 4) while he seeks such authorization. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that the Court deny 40 Petitioner's Motion for Relief from Judgment or Order and that the Court construe 39 Petitioner's Motion for Declaratory Relief as a motion to supplement the Second Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and grant that motion. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that if the Court adopts this Report and Recommendation, it order Respondents to file an answer to Grounds Four, Five, and Six and to the motion for declaratory relief (construed as a motion to supplement the Second Amended Petition) within thirty days of the Court's order, and state in its order that Petitioner may file a rely within thirty days of service of Respondents' answer. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that the Court deny Petitioner's motions for expedited ruling on his Motion for Declaratory Relief and Motion for Relief from Judgment. (Docs.
0
2015-08-21
D09002ee18f5e6316
https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/USCOURTS-azd-3_14-cv-08047/USCOURTS-azd-3_14-cv-08047-0
azd-3_14-cv-08047_0.pdf
https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/USCOURTS-azd-3_14-cv-08047/USCOURTS-azd-3_14-cv-08047-0
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-azd-3_14-cv-08047/pdf/USCOURTS-azd-3_14-cv-08047-0.pdf
USCOURTS 3:14-cv-08047; Eddy #053476 v. Ryan et al;
United States District Court District of Arizona
Arizona
USCOURTS-azd-3_14-cv-08047-0
0
2015-08-21
41, 42.). Signed by Magistrate Judge Bridget S Bade on 8/20/15. (LSP)REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION recommending that the Court dismiss Grounds One, Two, and Three without prejudice to Petitioner seeking authorization from the Ninth Circuit to bring those claims in a successive § 2254 petition, and that the Court deny Petitioner's request to stay this matter (Doc. 46 at 4) while he seeks such authorization. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that the Court deny 40 Petitioner's Motion for Relief from Judgment or Order and that the Court construe 39 Petitioner's Motion for Declaratory Relief as a motion to supplement the Second Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and grant that motion. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that if the Court adopts this Report and Recommendation, it order Respondents to file an answer to Grounds Four, Five, and Six and to the motion for declaratory relief (construed as a motion to supplement the Second Amended Petition) within thirty days of the Court's order, and state in its order that Petitioner may file a rely within thirty days of service of Respondents' answer. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that the Court deny Petitioner's motions for expedited ruling on his Motion for Declaratory Relief and Motion for Relief from Judgment. (Docs.
Eddy #053476 v. Ryan et al
ORDER accepting Report and Recommendations 47.... IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Court denies Petitioner's Motion for Relief from Judgment or Order. (Doc. 40.) IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Court construes Petitioner's Motion for Declaratory Relief (Doc. 39) as a motion to supplement the Second Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and grants that motion. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Court denies Petitioner's motions for expedited ruling on his Motion for Declaratory Relief and Motion for Relief from Judgment. (Docs. 41, 42.) (See document for full details). Signed by Judge Neil V Wake on 9/8/15.(LAD)
1
2015-09-09
D09002ee18f5e6315
https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/USCOURTS-azd-3_14-cv-08047/USCOURTS-azd-3_14-cv-08047-1
azd-3_14-cv-08047_1.pdf
https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/USCOURTS-azd-3_14-cv-08047/USCOURTS-azd-3_14-cv-08047-1
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-azd-3_14-cv-08047/pdf/USCOURTS-azd-3_14-cv-08047-1.pdf
USCOURTS 3:14-cv-08047; Eddy #053476 v. Ryan et al;
United States District Court District of Arizona
Arizona
USCOURTS-azd-3_14-cv-08047-1
1
2015-09-09
ORDER accepting Report and Recommendations 47.... IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Court denies Petitioner's Motion for Relief from Judgment or Order. (Doc. 40.) IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Court construes Petitioner's Motion for Declaratory Relief (Doc. 39) as a motion to supplement the Second Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and grants that motion. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Court denies Petitioner's motions for expedited ruling on his Motion for Declaratory Relief and Motion for Relief from Judgment. (Docs. 41, 42.) (See document for full details). Signed by Judge Neil V Wake on 9/8/15.(LAD)
Eddy #053476 v. Ryan et al
ORDER granting 101 Petitioner's MOTION to file a supplemental reply and REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION recommending 22 Second Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State/2254) filed by Dennis Paul Eddy be denied. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that a Certificate of Appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal be DENIED because the dismissal of the Petition is justified by a plain procedural bar and reasonable jurists would not find the procedural ruling debatable and because Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. Signed by Magistrate Judge Bridget S Bade on 03-28-16. (GAR)
2
2016-03-29
D09002ee18f5e6317
https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/USCOURTS-azd-3_14-cv-08047/USCOURTS-azd-3_14-cv-08047-2
azd-3_14-cv-08047_2.pdf
https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/USCOURTS-azd-3_14-cv-08047/USCOURTS-azd-3_14-cv-08047-2
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-azd-3_14-cv-08047/pdf/USCOURTS-azd-3_14-cv-08047-2.pdf
USCOURTS 3:14-cv-08047; Eddy #053476 v. Ryan et al;
United States District Court District of Arizona
Arizona
USCOURTS-azd-3_14-cv-08047-2
2
2016-03-29
ORDER granting 101 Petitioner's MOTION to file a supplemental reply and REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION recommending 22 Second Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State/2254) filed by Dennis Paul Eddy be denied. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that a Certificate of Appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal be DENIED because the dismissal of the Petition is justified by a plain procedural bar and reasonable jurists would not find the procedural ruling debatable and because Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. Signed by Magistrate Judge Bridget S Bade on 03-28-16. (GAR)
Eddy #053476 v. Ryan et al
*ORDER ADOPTING 102 Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. A Certificate of Appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal are denied because dismissal of the second amended petition is justified by a plain procedural bar and reasonable jurists would not find the procedural ruling debatable and because Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying Petitioner's Motion to Submit a Second Supplement Reply to the Respondent's Answer Due to the Most Recent Attempted Murder of Petitioner's Life (Doc. 105). The Clerk shall enter judgment denying and dismissing petitioner's Second Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 22) with prejudice. The Clerk shall terminate this action. Signed by Judge Neil V Wake on 05/02/16. (GAR) Modified text on 5/3/2016 (LSP).
3
2016-05-02
D09002ee18f5e6318
https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/USCOURTS-azd-3_14-cv-08047/USCOURTS-azd-3_14-cv-08047-3
azd-3_14-cv-08047_3.pdf
https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/USCOURTS-azd-3_14-cv-08047/USCOURTS-azd-3_14-cv-08047-3
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-azd-3_14-cv-08047/pdf/USCOURTS-azd-3_14-cv-08047-3.pdf
USCOURTS 3:14-cv-08047; Eddy #053476 v. Ryan et al;
United States District Court District of Arizona
Arizona
USCOURTS-azd-3_14-cv-08047-3
3
2016-05-02
*ORDER ADOPTING 102 Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. A Certificate of Appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal are denied because dismissal of the second amended petition is justified by a plain procedural bar and reasonable jurists would not find the procedural ruling debatable and because Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying Petitioner's Motion to Submit a Second Supplement Reply to the Respondent's Answer Due to the Most Recent Attempted Murder of Petitioner's Life (Doc. 105). The Clerk shall enter judgment denying and dismissing petitioner's Second Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 22) with prejudice. The Clerk shall terminate this action. Signed by Judge Neil V Wake on 05/02/16. (GAR) Modified text on 5/3/2016 (LSP).