Joseph Vigil v. Ronald Martinez, et al.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO JOSEPH VIGIL, Petitioner, v. Civ. No. 22-26 MV/KK RONALD MARTINEZ, et al., Respondents.

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION THIS MATTER comes before the Court on United States Magistrate Judge Kirtan Khalsa’s Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition (“PFRD”) (Doc. 35), filed September 18, 2025. In the PFRD, Magistrate Judge Khalsa recommended denying Mr. Vigil’s pro se petition for federal relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 and dismissing it with prejudice. (Id.) Judge Khalsa further recommended that Mr. Vigil’s Pro Se Motion to Dismiss § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and to Grant Stay [of] Time Bar to [Exhaust] State [Remedies] (Doc. 27) be denied. (Id.) Judge Khalsa notified the parties that they had 14 days from service of the PFRD to file any objections to the PFRD. (Id. at 19.) Neither party has filed objections to the PFRD, thereby waiving their right to review of the proposed disposition. See United States v. One Parcel of Real Prop., 73 F.3d 1057, 1060 (10th Cir. 1996). Upon review of the record, I concur with Judge Khalsa’s findings and recommendations and hereby ADOPT the Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition (Doc. 35). In addition, because Mr. Vigil failed to make a substantial showing that he has been denied a constitutional right or demonstrated that reasonable jurists would find the ruling debatable, the Court hereby DENIES a Certificate of Appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253.

IT IS SO ORDERED. for MARTHA WAZQ | ‘SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE