Wright v. Jones

Filing 16

ORDER Adopting 11 Report and Recommendation, OVERRULING PETITIONERS OBJECTIONS, AND DENYING PETITIONERS APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS Signed by District Judge Paul D Borman. (DGoo)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION ALPHONZO LEON WRIGHT Petitioner, vs. KURT JONES, Respondent. ____________________________/ ORDER ACCEPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION, OVERRULING PETITIONER'S OBJECTIONS, AND DENYING PETITIONER'S APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS On September 28, 2009, Magistrate Judge Paul J. Komives issued a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") in which he recommends that Petitioner's Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus be denied. Petitioner has filed untimely objections to the R&R.1 The Court has had an opportunity to fully review this matter and finds that Magistrate Judge Komives has reached the proper conclusions for the proper reasons. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Komives' R&R dated September 28, 2009, is accepted and adopted as the findings and conclusions of the Court. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner's objections to the R&R are overruled. PAUL D. BORMAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Civil Action No. 07-CV-10469 On October 14, 2009, the Court issued an order giving Petitioner additional time--until November 14, 2009--to file objections to the R&R. See docket entry 13. Petitioner filed his objections on November 16, 2009, two days late. In any event, the Court has reviewed the objections and finds them to be largely, if not entirely, irrelevant. 1 1 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner's Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus is denied. S/Paul D. Borman PAUL D. BORMAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dated: December 15, 2009 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Copies of this Order were served on the attorneys of record by electronic means or U.S. Mail on December 15, 2009. S/Denise Goodine Case Manager 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?