Sutton v. Bates

Filing 20

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 19 and DISMISSING CASE with prejudice. No certificate of appealability to issue. Signed by Chief Judge David R. Herndon on 12/18/2012. (msdi)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
ERIC SUTTON,
Petitioner,
v.
ZACH ROECKEMAN,
Respondent.

Case No. 11-cv-908-DRH
ORDER

HERNDON, Chief Judge:
On October 6, 2011, petitioner Eric Sutton filed this petition pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 2254 against the respondent, Ty Bates,1 warden of the Big Muddy River
Correctional Center (Doc. 1).

Specifically, petitioner raised a claim of actual

innocence of his 1998 murder and attempted murder convictions. On November 27,
2012, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), United States Magistrate Judge Phillip
M. Frazier submitted a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) (Doc. 19)
recommending that the Court deny and dismiss petitioner’s § 2254 motion on the
basis that petitioner’s claim of actual innocense is not a cognizable ground for federal
habeas corpus relief. The R&R also recommended that not certificate of appealability
should issue.
The R&R was sent to the parties with a notice informing them of their right to

1

Magistrate Judge Frazier substituted Zach Roeckeman, Big Muddy’s
current warden, as the respondent pursuant to Rule 25(d) of the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure.
Page 1 of 2

appeal by way of filing “objections” on or before December 14, 2012. To date, none
of the parties have filed objections, and the period in which to file objections has
expired. Therefore, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), this Court need not conduct de
novo review. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149-52 (1985).
Thus, the Court adopts the R&R in its entirety. Petitioner’s § 2254 motion is
denied, and this case is dismissed with prejudice. No certificate of appealability shall
be issued.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed this 18th day of December, 2012.

David R.
Herndon
2012.12.18
16:27:24 -06'00'
Chief Judge
United States District Court

Page 2 of 2