Manley v. Coleman

Filing 7

Opinion and Order signed by Judge James S. Gwin on 2/18/14 adopting the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge Judge and denying petition to vacate sentence filed by Ricky D. Manley. (Related Docs. 1 , 6 ) (M,G)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
------------------------------------------------------:
RICKY D. MANLEY,
:
:
Petitioner,
:
:
v.
:
:
JOHN COLEMAN,
:
:
Respondent.
:
-------------------------------------------------------

CASE NO. 3:13-CV-107

OPINION & ORDER
[Resolving Doc. No. 1]

JAMES S. GWIN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE:
On January 16, 2013, Petitioner Manley moved to vacate his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 2254.1/ Petitioner said that prosecutorial misconduct occurred during closing argument when the
prosecutor personally vouched for the credibility of state witnesses and denigrated the role and
performance of defense counsel.2/ The Court referred the petition to Magistrate Judge Greg White
for a Report and Recommendation.3/ On September 12, 2013, Magistrate Judge White issued a report
recommending this Court deny the petition.4/ Petitioner Manley has not filed an objection. The Court
ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation and DENIES Petitioner’s motion.
The Federal Magistrates Act requires a district court to conduct a de novo review only of
those portions of a Report and Recommendation to which the parties have made an objection.5/

1/

Doc. 1.

2/

Id. at 5.

3/

Doc. 2.
4/
Doc. 6.
5/

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

-1-

Case No. 3:13-CV-107
Gwin, J.
Parties must file any objections to a Report and Recommendation within fourteen days of service.6/
Failure to object within that time waives a party’s right to appeal the magistrate judge’s
recommendation.7/ Absent objection, a district court may adopt the magistrate’s report without
review.8/ Moreover, having conducted its own review of the petition,9/ this Court agrees with the
conclusions of the Magistrate Judge.
Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS in whole Magistrate Judge White’s findings of fact and
conclusions of law and incorporates them fully herein by reference. The Court DENIES Petitioner’s
§ 2254 petition. Moreover, the Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal
from this decision could not be taken in good faith, and no basis exists upon which to issue a
certificate of appealability.10/
IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/
James S. Gwin
JAMES S. GWIN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: February 18, 2014

6/

Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a).

7/

Id.; see Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 145 (1985); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 949-50 (6th Cir.

8/

Thomas, 474 U.S. at 149.
Petitioner never filed a Traverse.

1981).
9/

10/

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b).

-2-