Haller v. Warden London Correctional Institution

Filing 25

OPINION and ORDER adopting and affirming 23 the Report and Recommendation; denying 24 Petitioner's Motion for Verification. Signed by Judge Michael H. Watson on 3/8/17. (jk) (This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION RONALD HAULER, CASE NO. 2:14-cv-373 Petitioner, JUDGE MICHAEL H. WATSON MAGISTRATE JUDGE KEMP V. WARDEN, LONDON CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, Respondent. OPINION AND ORDER On January 10,2017, the Magistrate Judge Issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that the instant petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 be dismissed, EOF No. 23. Although the parties were advised of the right to object to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, and of the consequences of failing to do so, no objections have been filed. The objections were due on January 24, 2017. On March 1, 2017, Petitioner filed a Motion Requesting that the Court Verify the Docket Number of Each Document Enclosed Herein, in which he has attached the Affidavit of Joshua R. Nailer, the Affidavit of James Gibson, and what purports to be a gun receipt from "Vandalia Tactical." EOF No. 24, PagelD# 868. Petitioner submits such documents, which apparently are already a part of the record, in support of his claim that the evidence was constitutionally insufficient to sustain his convictions. However, Petitioner has not submitted any objections to the Magistrate Judge's recommendation of dismissai of this action, and any objections would now be untimely. The Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 23, is ADOPTED and AFFIRIMED. Petitioner's motion for verification, ECF No. 24, is DENIED. This action is hereby DISMISSED. IT IS SO ORDERED. liCHAEL H. WATSON United States District Judge

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?