KUPLEN v. PERRY

Filing 34

ORDER signed by CHIEF JUDGE WILLIAM L. OSTEEN JR. on 07/10/2015, that the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation (Doc. 26 ) is ADOPTED. FURTHER that Respondent's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 9 ) is GRANTED, that Pet itioner's Petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 2 ) is DENIED, and that this action is DISMISSED. FURTHER that Petitioner's pending motions (Docs. 14 , 15 and 24 ) are DENIED AS MOOT. A Judgment dismissing this action will be entered contemporaneously with this Order. Finding no substantial issue for appeal concerning the denial of a constitutional right(Taylor, Abby)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
JOHN EDWARD KUPLEN,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Petitioner,
v.
FRANK PERRY,
Respondent.

1:14CV598

ORDER
This matter is before this court for review of the
Memorandum Opinion and Recommendation filed on February 20,
2015, by the Magistrate Judge in accordance with 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(b). (Doc. 26.)

In the Recommendation, the Magistrate

Judge recommends that Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 9) be
granted, that Petitioner’s Petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for
Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 2) be denied, and that Judgment be
entered dismissing this action, without the issuance of a
certificate of appealability.

The Magistrate Judge also

recommended that Petitioner’s pending motions (Docs. 14, 15 and
24) be denied as moot. The Recommendation was served on the
parties to this action on February 20, 2015 (Doc. 27).

After

receiving two extensions, Petitioner filed objections (Doc. 33)
to the Recommendation.

This court is required to Amake a de novo determination of
those portions of the [Magistrate Judge=s] report or specified
proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.@
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

This court Amay accept, reject, or

modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations
made by the [M]agistrate [J]udge. . . . [O]r recommit the matter
to the [M]agistrate [J]udge with instructions.@

Id.

This court has appropriately reviewed the portions of the
Recommendation to which objections were made and has made a
de novo determination which is in accord with the Magistrate
Judge=s Recommendation.

This court therefore adopts the

Recommendation in full.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge=s
Recommendation (Doc. 26) is ADOPTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that

Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 9) is GRANTED, that
Petitioner’s Petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for Writ of Habeas
Corpus (Doc. 2) is DENIED, and that this action is DISMISSED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Petitioner’s
pending motions (Docs. 14, 15 and 24) are DENIED AS MOOT.
A Judgment dismissing this action will be entered
contemporaneously with this Order.

Finding no substantial issue

for appeal concerning the denial of a constitutional right

- 2 -

affecting the conviction, nor a debatable procedural ruling, a
certificate of appealability is not issued.
This the 10th day of July, 2015.

_____________________________________
United States District Judge

- 3 -