ABBOTT v. BURNHEIMER
Filing
18
ORDER AFFIRMING RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE - adopting Report and Recommended Decision re 12 Report and Recommendations re 7 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by DREW G ABBOTT. To the extent the petitioner has moved for legal counsel, the motion is Denied, no other action is necessary on 15 Motion for Legal Assistance / Motion to Amend. No Certificate of Appealability should issue because there is no substantial issue that could be presented on appeal. See Fed.R.App.P.22 and Rule 11 of the Rules Governing Proceedings Under 28 U.S.C. Section 2254 or Section 2255. See also First Circuit Local Rule 22.0. By JUDGE D. BROCK HORNBY. (mnw)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MAINE
DREW G. ABBOTT,
PETITIONER
v.
SCOTT BURNHEIMER,
RESPONDENT
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CIVIL NO. 1:12-CV-37-DBH
ORDER AFFIRMING RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE
On April 27, 2012, the United States Magistrate Judge filed with the
court, with copies to the parties, her Recommended Decision on the Petition
Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for a Writ of Habeas Corpus By a Person in State
Custody. The petitioner filed his objection to the Recommended Decision on
May 22, 2012.
The petitioner also filed a document, ECF No. 15, that the Clerk’s Office
treated as a letter motion for legal assistance and a motion to amend the
petition to add additional grounds. But the petitioner did not seek to amend
his petition in this document. He did earlier file an amended petition and that
amended petition is the basis for the Magistrate Judge’s and my ruling. (The
petitioner expressed concern about whether the “new petition” would be added
to the first petition—it was—and whether he signed it—he did.) There is no
need to appoint counsel in light of the lack of any basis for the petitioner’s
arguments and to the extent he has moved for legal counsel, the motion is
DENIED. No other action is necessary on pleading ECF No. 15.
I have reviewed and considered the Recommended Decision, together
with the entire record; I have made a de novo determination of all matters
adjudicated
by
the
Recommended
Decision;
and
I
concur
with
the
recommendations of the United States Magistrate Judge for the reasons set
forth in the Recommended Decision, and determine that no further proceeding
is necessary.
It is therefore ORDERED that the Recommended Decision of the Magistrate
Judge is hereby ADOPTED.
The petitioner is DENIED relief under 28 U.S.C.
§ 2254, with prejudice, and the petition is DISMISSED.
No certificate of
appealability shall issue in the event the petitioner files a notice of appeal
because there is no substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right
within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2).
SO ORDERED.
DATED THIS 19TH DAY OF JUNE, 2012
/S/D. BROCK HORNBY
D. BROCK HORNBY
UNITED STATES 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?