Tinsley v. R,K. Woods

Filing 23

MEMORANDUM DECISION for 22 Report and Recommendations. Judge Davisons Report and Recommendation was filed on June 16, 2011. To date, noobjection has been received from any party to this action. Reviewing the Report and Recommendation, the Court se es no clear error in Judge Davison's findings of fact or his legal conclusions. More so, the Court believes the Report and Recommendation is correct as a matter of law. Accordingly, it is adopted as the decision of the Court. The petition for a writ of habeas corpus (Doc. #1) is DENIED. The Clerk is instructed to close this case. (Signed by Judge Vincent L. Briccetti on 7/26/2011) The Clerks Office Has Mailed Copies. (rj)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
--------------------------------------------------------------x
JASON TINSLEY,
:
Petitioner,
:
:
v.
:
:
R.K. WOODS, Superintendent, Upstate
:
Correctional Facility,
:
Respondent.
:
--------------------------------------------------------------x

MEMORANDUM DECISION
7:08-cv-1332 (VB)

Briccetti, J.:
Now pending before the Court is the Report and Recommendation by Magistrate Judge
Paul E. Davison dated June 16, 2011 on petitioner Jason Tinsley’s petition for a writ of habeas
corpus. In his Report and Recommendation, Judge Davison recommended that the Court deny
the petition.
A district court reviewing a magistrate judge’s recommended ruling “may accept, reject,
or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.”
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). Parties may raise objections to the recommended ruling, but they
must be “specific” and “written,” and submitted “[w]ithin 10 days after being served with a copy
of the recommended disposition.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C).
The district court may adopt those portions of the recommended ruling to which no timely
objections have been made, provided no clear error is apparent from the face of the record. See
Wilds v. UPS, Inc., 262 F. Supp. 2d 163, 169 (S.D.N.Y. 2003); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory
committee’s note (b).
Judge Davison’s Report and Recommendation was filed on June 16, 2011. To date, no
objection has been received from any party to this action. Reviewing the Report and
1

Recommendation, the Court sees no clear error in Judge Davison's findings of fact or his legal
conclusions. More so, the Court believes the Report and Recommendation is correct as a matter
of law. Accordingly, it is adopted as the decision of the Court.
The petition for a writ of habeas corpus (Doc. #1) is DENIED.
The Clerk is instructed to close this case.

iJ,

Dated: July
2011
White Plains, New York

Vincent . riccetti
United States District Judge

2