WARDWELL v. BOUFFARD

Filing 20

ORDER AFFIRMING THE RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE dismissing 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus; adopting Report and Recommended Decision re 16 Report and Recommendations. 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 NANCY TORRESEN. (mjlt)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MAINE GAYLON L. WARDWELL, Petitioner, v. WARDEN, RODNEY BOUFFARD, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil No. 1:14-cv-00204-NT ORDER AFFIRMING THE RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE The United States Magistrate Judge filed with the Court on October 21, 2014 his Recommended Decision (ECF No. 16). The Petitioner filed his Objection to the Recommended Decision (ECF No. 19) on November 28, 2014. I have reviewed and considered the Magistrate Judge's Recommended Decision, together with the entire record; I have made a de novo determination of all matters adjudicated by the Magistrate Judge's Recommended Decision; and I concur with the recommendations of the United States Magistrate Judge for the reasons set forth in his Recommended Decision, and determine that no further proceeding is 1 necessary. It is therefore ORDERED that the Recommended Decision of the Magistrate Judge is hereby AFFIRMED. 1. It is further ORDERED that the Petitioner’s motion for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 is DISMISSED. 2. It is further ORDERED that a certificate of appealability pursuant to Rule 11 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases is hereby DENIED because there is no substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 253(c)(2). SO ORDERED. /s/ Nancy Torresen UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dated this 3rd day of December, 2014. 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?