Ray v. Kelly

Filing 25

ORDER ADOPTING 20 Report and Recommendations in its entirety; further petitioner's petition for writ of habeas corpus is denied and case is dismissed with prejudice. Signed by Honorable P. K. Holmes, III on December 21, 2016. (rw)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS HOT SPRINGS DIVISION GIFFORD RAY v. PETITIONER No. 6:16-CV-06044 WENDY KELLY, Director, Arkansas Department of Correction RESPONDENT ORDER The Court has received a report and recommendations (Doc. 20) from Chief United States Magistrate Judge Barry A. Bryant, and timely objections (Doc. 21) from Petitioner Norman H. May. Respondent Wendy Kelly has filed a response (Doc. 22) to the objections, and Petitioner has filed a reply (Doc. 23) and supplement (Doc. 24) to that replay without leave of Court. Nevertheless, the Court has considered the reply and supplement. The Magistrate recommends that Petitioner’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus (Doc. 1) be denied for lack of jurisdiction. The Magistrate further recommends that no certificate of appealability issue. Upon due consideration, the Court finds that Petitioner’s objections, reply, and supplement offer neither law nor fact requiring departure from the Magistrate’s findings and recommendations, that the Magistrate’s report does not otherwise contain clear error, and that the report (Doc. 20) should be, and hereby is, ADOPTED IN ITS ENTIRETY. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Petitioner’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus (Doc. 1) is DENIED and this case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. No certificate of appealability shall issue. Judgment will be entered accordingly. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the remaining motions in this case are TERMINATED AS MOOT. 1 IT IS SO ORDERED this 21st day of December, 2016. /s/P. K. Holmes, III P.K. HOLMES, III CHIEF U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?