Tuggle v. Welch

Filing 10

Memorandum Opinion and Order adopting the Report and Recommendation in its entirety, re 8 . Tuggle's objections are overruled, re 9 and the Court Grants Welch's Motion to dismiss, re 5 . Tuggle's complaint is dismissed. Judge John R. Adams on 11/18/10. (R,Sh)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION ANTOINE TUGGLE Petitioner, vs. ROBERT WELCH, WARDEN, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CASE NO. 3:10cv812 JUDGE JOHN R. ADAMS MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER This action is before the Court upon objections filed by Petitioner, Antoine Tuggle, to the Report and Recommendation ("the Report") of Magistrate Judge Kenneth McHargh (Doc. 8). Tuggle "largely agrees" with Magistrate Judge McHargh's Report and Recommendation for dismissal. Accordingly, he agrees that this issue is still pending in state court and therefore, he has not completely exhausted his available state remedies. He objects simply, "out of great caution." Tuggle does not point to any specific error in the Report and Recommendation; rather, he seeks to assert his objection to protect himself in the event he faces a dismissal of a subsequent habeas petition being labeled as untimely filed. While recognizing Tuggle's desire to preserve the record, the Court overrules his objections. Upon due consideration, the Court overrules the objections and adopts the Report and Recommended findings and conclusions of Magistrate Judge McHargh and incorporates them herein. Therefore, it is ordered that the complaint is hereby DISMISSED. 1 The Court hereby ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation in its entirety. Tuggle's objections are overruled and the Court grants Welch's motion to dismiss. Tuggle's complaint is dismissed. IT IS SO ORDERED. November 18, 2010 /s/ John R. Adams_______ JUDGE JOHN R. ADAMS UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?