Newman v. Lempke

Filing 26

-CLERK TO FOLLOW UP-DECISION AND ORDER adopting Magistrate Judge Michael J. Roemer's Report and Recommendation 25 . The petition for a writ of habeas corpus is denied in its entirety. No further certificate of appealability will be issued. Pu rsuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A), the Court has also reviewed both the petitioner's motion for reconsideration of the order denying his motion to hold his petition in abeyance 22 and his motion for an extension of time 23 . Neither ord er is clearly erroneous or contrary to law, and both orders are therefore affirmed. The Clerk of Court shall take all steps necessary to close the case. A copy of this order and entry has been mailed to Rodney M. Newman, 10B2169, GOWANDA CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, Box 311, Gowanda, NY 14070-0311 SO ORDERED. Signed by Hon. Richard J. Arcara on 9/29/16. (LAS)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

RODNEY M. NEWMAN,
Petitioner,
DECISION AND ORDER
13-CV-531

v.
J. LEMPKE,

Respondent.

This case was referred to Magistrate Judge Michael J. Roemer, pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). On August 9, 2016, Magistrate Judge Roemer filed a Report,
Recommendation, and Order (Dkt. No. 25), recommending that petitioner’s petition for
a writ of habeas corpus (Dkt. No. 1) be denied in its entirety and that the Court decline
to issue a certificate of appealability. Magistrate Judge Roemer further denied both the
petitioner’s motion for reconsideration of the order denying his motion to hold his
petition in abeyance (Dkt. No. 22) and his motion for an extension of time (Dkt. No. 23).
The Court has carefully reviewed the Report, Recommendation, and Order, the
record in this case, and the pleadings and materials submitted by the parties, and no
objections having been timely filed, it is hereby
ORDERED, that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), and for the reasons set forth
in Magistrate Judge Roemer’s Report and Recommendation, petitioner Newman’s
petition for a writ of habeas corpus is denied in its entirety. It is further ordered that no
certificate of appealability be issued. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A), the Court
has also reviewed both the petitioner’s motion for reconsideration of the order denying

his motion to hold his petition in abeyance (Dkt. No. 22) and his motion for an extension
of time (Dkt. No. 23). Neither order is clearly erroneous or contrary to law, and both
orders are therefore affirmed.
The Clerk of Court shall take all steps necessary to close the case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

____Richard J. Arcara____________
HONORABLE RICHARD J. ARCARA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Dated: September 29, 2016