Richardson v. Kelly
Filing
10
Order Adopting 9 Report and Recommendation and dismissing 1 the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2254). Judge Jack Zouhary on 6/8/2016. (D,L)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION
Charles V. Richardson,
Case No. 3:15 CV 539
Petitioner,
ORDER ADOPTING
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
-vsJUDGE JACK ZOUHARY
Bennie Kelly, Warden,
Respondent.
This Court has reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s May 19, 2016 Report and Recommendation
(“R&R”) (Doc. 9). The R&R recommends the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus be dismissed with
prejudice.
Under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), a party must serve written objections to an R&R within fourteen
(14) days of being served with the R&R. If a party timely objects, this Court reviews de novo the
portions of the R&R to which objections were made. If a party does not timely object, the party
waives de novo review by the district court. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985); United
States v. Sullivan, 431 F.3d 976, 984 (6th Cir. 2005).
Richardson’s deadline for filing objections has passed, and this Court received no requests for
extension. The R&R accurately states the facts and law. This Court adopts the R&R in full.
The Petition (Doc. 1) is dismissed with prejudice. Further, this Court certifies an appeal from
this decision could not be taken in good faith and there is no basis upon which to issue a certificate
of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/ Jack Zouhary
JACK ZOUHARY
U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE
June 8, 2016
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?