Gilbert v. Burkes
Filing
14
Memorandum of Opinion and Order For the reasons set forth herein, the Court adopts the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 12 ). Respondent's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 11 ) is granted. Petitioner Hattie Gilbert 's Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus is dismissed with prejudice.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 that there is no basis upon which to issue a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b). Judge Benita Y. Pearson on 6/30/2016. (JLG)
PEARSON, J.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION
HATTIE GILBERT,
Petitioner,
v.
RONETTE BURKES,
Respondent.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CASE NO. 4:15CV01153
JUDGE BENITA Y. PEARSON
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND
ORDER
Pro se Petitioner Hattie Gilbert filed a Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 2254, see ECF No. 1-2. Petitioner alleges eight grounds for relief, challenging the
constitutional sufficiency of his conviction for: attempted murder, felonious assault, aggravated
robbery, and kidnapping. All charges carried firearm specifications. A jury found Petitioner
guilty on all counts. On September 23, 2008, the trial court sentenced Petitioner to an aggregate
term of fifty years in prison.
On June 22, 2015, the case was referred to Magistrate Judge William H. Baughman, Jr.
for preparation of a report and recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Local Rule
72.2(b)(2). On October 7, 2015, Respondent filed a motion to dismiss, ECF No. 11. Petitioner
did not respond. On April 21, 2016, the magistrate judge submitted a report (ECF No. 12)
recommending that the Court grant Respondent’s motion to dismiss (ECF No. 11) and dismiss
the Petition with prejudice.
(4:15CV01153)
Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2) provides that objections to a report and recommendation must be
filed within fourteen (14) days after service.1 Petitioner filed a motion for extension of time until
June 1, 2016 to file objections, ECF No. 13. The Court granted the motion. Petitioner has not
filed any objections to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. Any further review by
the Court would be a duplicative and inefficient use of the Court’s limited resources. Thomas v.
Arn, 728 F.2d 813 (6th Cir. 1984), aff’d, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); Howard v. Secretary of Health
and Human Services, 932 F.2d 505 (6th Cir. 1991); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 94950 (6th Cir. 1981). Accordingly, the Court adopts the magistrate judge’s report and
recommendation (ECF No. 12). Respondent’s motion to dismiss (ECF No. 11) is granted.
Petitioner Hattie Gilbert’s Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus is dismissed with prejudice.
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 that there is no basis upon which to issue a certificate of
appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
June 30, 2016
Date
/s/ Benita Y. Pearson
Benita Y. Pearson
United States District Judge
1
Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d), three days must be added to the fourteen-day time
period because Petitioner was served the Magistrate Judge’s Report by mail. See
Thompson v. Chandler, 36 Fed. Appx. 783, 784 (6th Cir. 2002).
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?