Hosey v. Goff

Filing 23

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 19 Report and Recommendations Signed by District Judge Halil S. Ozerden on 4/11/2013 (wld)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
SOUTHERN DIVISION
JHERASHIO RAMANDES HOSEY
VERSUS
PRESTON GOFF, JR.

PETITIONER
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:12cv161HSO-RHW
RESPONDENT

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
AND DISMISSING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation of United
States Magistrate Judge Robert H. Walker [19] entered in this cause on March 11,
2013. The Court has thoroughly reviewed the findings in the Report and
Recommendation, the record, and the positions advanced by the parties in the
Petition and Response, and concludes that Hosey’s Petition for Writ of Habeas
Corpus [1] filed pursuant to 28 U.S. C. § 2254, lacks merit and should be denied.
To date, no formal objection to the Report and Recommendation has been
filed by Petitioner.1 Where no party has objected to the Magistrate Judge’s Report
and Recommendation, the Court need not conduct a de novo review of it. See 28
U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (“a judge of the court shall make a de novo determination of those
portions of the report or specified proposed findings and recommendations to which
objection is made.”). In such cases, the Court need only review the Report and
Recommendation and determine whether it is either clearly erroneous or contrary
to law. United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir. 1989).
1

The Acknowledgment of Receipt [20] was filed on March 13, 2013, and
reflects that the Report and Recommendation was signed for on March 3, 2013.

Having conducted the required review, the Court finds that the Magistrate
Judge’s Report and Recommendation thoroughly considered all issues and is neither
clearly erroneous nor contrary to law. The Court, being fully advised in the
premises, finds that the Magistrate Judge properly recommended that Hosey’s
Petition for Habeas Corpus Relief should be denied. Said Report and
Recommendation should be adopted as the opinion of this Court.
The Court notes that on March 19, 2013, Petitioner filed a pleading styled as
an “Application for Certificate of Appealability,” requesting leave to appeal to the
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. To the extent this pleading
could be construed as an objection to the Report and Recommendation, Petitioner
merely restates the arguments which were considered and rejected by the
Magistrate Judge. Out of an abundance of caution, the Court has nonetheless
conducted a de novo review of the record and remains of the opinion that the Report
and Recommendation should be adopted as the opinion of the Court.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that, the Report and
Recommendation [19] of Magistrate Judge Robert H. Walker entered on March 11,
2013, is adopted as the finding of this Court.
IT IS, FURTHER, ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that, the Petition for
Habeas Corpus [1] filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 is DENIED. A separate
judgment will be entered in accordance with this order as required by Federal Rule
of Civil Procedure 58.

-2-

SO ORDERED AND ADJUDGED, this the 11th day of April, 2013.

s/ Halil Suleyman Ozerden
HALIL SULEYMAN OZERDEN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

-3-