Stratton v. Commonwealth of Kentucky

Filing 30

OPINION & ORDER: 1) Magistrate Judge's REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 19 is ADOPTED as and for the opinion of the Court; 2) Petitioner's objs. to Mag. Judge's R&R 25 26 are OVERRULED; 3) Petitioner's Petition for a W rit of Habeas Corpus 6 is DENIED; 4) Certificate of Appealability SHALL NOT BE ISSUED; and 5) Judgment will be entered contemporaneoulsy w/this Opinion and Order. Signed by Judge Karen K. Caldwell on 3/3/2011.(KRS)cc: COR, cc mailed this date to Petitioner, Charles W. Stratton. Modified text add copy mailed to Petitioner on 3/3/2011 (ECO).

Download PDF
-CJS Stratton v. Commonwealth of Kentucky Doc. 30 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY NORTHERN DIVISION at COVINGTON CIVIL ACTION NO. 10-107-KKC-CJS CHARLES W. STRATTON v. ED HALL, DIRECTOR *** *** *** *** On June 16, 2010, Petitioner Charles Stratton filed a pro se Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254 (DE 6). Consistent with local practice, this matter was referred to the United States Magistrate Judge for consideration. The Magistrate Judge filed a Report and Recommendation on December 28, 2010 (DE 19). Based on a review of the record and the applicable case law, the Magistrate Judge recommended that Petitioner Stratton's Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus be denied, a Certificate of Appealability be denied, and this action be stricken from the docket. This Court must make a de novo determination of those portions of the Magistrate Judge's proposed Report and Recommendation to which objection is made. 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(C). On February 3, 2011, Petitioner Stratton filed objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (DE 25, 26). However, rather than specifically object to portions of the Report and Recommendation, Petitioner Stratton merely rehashes those arguments that have already been fully considered and rejected by the Magistrate Judge. Nevertheless, this Court has given full consideration to the Petitioner's objections. Having considered the issues raised de novo, the Court finds the Petitioner's objections to OPINION & ORDER RESPONDENT PETITIONER Dockets.Justia.com be without merit. Because the issues raised were thoroughly and correctly addressed by the Magistrate Judge, writing in detail is unnecessary. Wherefore, the Court hereby adopts the Magistrate Judge's proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law. Accordingly, the Court HEREBY ORDERS as follows: (1) The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (DE 19) is ADOPTED as and for the opinion of the Court; (2) Petitioner's objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (DE 25, 26) are OVERRULED; (3) (4) (5) Petitioner's Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus (DE 6) is DENIED; A Certificate of Appealability SHALL NOT BE ISSUED; and Judgment will be entered contemporaneously with this Opinion and Order. Dated this 3rd day of March, 2011.

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?