Graham v. Baden

Filing 8

ORDER adopting Report and Recommendations re 7 Report and Recommendations. Accordingly, Plaintiff's federal habeas corpus petition is dismissed without prejudice and the Court further denies Petitioner a certificate of appealability. Ordered by Judge W. Louis Sands on 1:11-cv-123 (wks)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ALBANY DIVISION
ISAAC GRAHAM,

:
:
Petitioner,
:
:
v.
:
:
JOSEPH BADEN,
:
:
Respondent.
:
____________________________________:

Case No. 1:11-cv-123 (WLS)

ORDER
Before the Court is a Report and Recommendation from United States Magistrate Judge
Thomas Q. Langstaff, filed October 3, 2011. (Doc. 7). It is recommended that Petitioner’s 28
U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition, which challenges Petitioner’s 1971 guilty plea (see Doc.
1), be dismissed as time barred and that the Court deny Petitioner a certificate of appealability.
(Doc. 7 at 3-5, 7).
The Report and Recommendation provided the Parties with fourteen (14) days1 from the
date of its service to file written objections to the recommendations therein. (Doc. 7 at 7). The
period for filing objections expired on Thursday, October 20, 2011; no objections have been filed
to date. (See Docket).
Upon full review and consideration of the record, and in view of the absence of any
objection from the record, the Court finds that U.S. Magistrate Judge Thomas Q. Langstaff’s
October 3, 2011 Report and Recommendation (Doc. 7) should be, and hereby is, ACCEPTED,
ADOPTED and made the Order of this Court for reason of the findings made and reasons stated

The Parties were given an additional three days because service was made by mail. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d)
(adding three days to specified period within which a party may act if service is made under Rule 5(b)(2)(C) by
mailing process to a party’s last known address).
1

1

therein. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s federal habeas corpus petition, filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
2254 (see Doc. 1), is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
The Court further DENIES Petitioner a certificate of appealability for failure to make a
substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, sufficient to issue a certificate of
appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2).
SO ORDERED, this 25th day of October 2011.
/s/ W. Louis Sands
THE HONORABLE W. LOUIS SANDS,
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2