Croce v. Miller

Filing 21

Memorandum Opinion: The Court has reviewed the Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation and accepts the same. (Doc. No. 20 .) Accordingly, the Court denies the petition in its entirety. Further, the Court certifies that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith and that there is no basis upon which to issue a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. Sections 1915(a)(3), 2253(c); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b). Judge Sara Lioi on 8/7/2017. (P,J)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION

PAUL CROCE,
PETITIONER,
vs.
MICHELLE MILLER, Warden,
RESPONDENT.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 1:15-cv-1758
JUDGE SARA LIOI
MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before the Court is the report and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge with
respect to the above-entitled petition for writ of habeas corpus. The Magistrate Judge
recommends dismissal of the petition in its entirety.
Under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C):
Within fourteen days after being served with a copy, any party may serve
and file written objections to such proposed findings and recommendations
as provided by rules of court. A judge of the court shall make a de novo
determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings
or recommendations to which objection is made. [. . .]

The R&R was filed on July 12, 2017 (Doc. No. 20), and was sent to petitioner that
same day by regular mail. As of the date of this order, no objections have been filed, no
extension has been requested, and no mail has been returned as undeliverable.
The failure to file written objections to a Magistrate Judge’s report and
recommendation constitutes a waiver of a de novo determination by the district court of an
issue covered in the report. Thomas v. Arn, 728 F.2d 813 (6th Cir. 1984), aff’d, 474 U.S.
140 (1985), reh’g denied, 474 U.S. 1111 (1986); see United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947
(6th Cir. 1981).

The Court has reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s report and recommendation and
accepts the same. Accordingly, the Court denies the petition in its entirety. Further, the
Court certifies that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith and that
there is no basis upon which to issue a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(a)(3),
2253(c); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b).
IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 7, 2017
HONORABLE SARA LIOI
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2