Powell v. Ross Correctional Facility

Filing 71

ENTRY AND ORDER OVERRULING PETITIONER'S OBJECTIONS 56 63 70 TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE MICHAEL R. MERZ'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 48 , SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 58 AND SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 65 ; ADOP TING IN THEIR ENTIRETY THE REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 48 58 65 ; DISMISSING WITH PREJUDICE THE PETITIONER'S PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS, DENYING PETITIONER A CERTIFICATE OF APPEAL ABILITY AND PERMISSION TO APPEAL IN FORMA PAUPERIS AND TERMINATING CASE. Signed by Judge Thomas M. Rose on 12-18-2018. (de)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON

CEDERIC E. POWELL-EL
Petitioner,
Case No. 3:16-cv-109
vs
District Judge Thomas M. Rose
Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz
MARK HOOKS, Warden,
Respondent,
______________________________________________________________________________
ENTRY AND ORDER OVERRULING PETITIONER=S OBJECTIONS (DOC. 56,63
AND 70) TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE MICHAEL R. MERZ=S REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION (DOC. 48), SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION (DOC. 58) AND SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION (65); ADOPTING IN THEIR ENTIRETY THE REPORTS
AND RECOMMENDATIONS (DOC. 48, 58 AND 65); DISMISSING WITH
PREJUDICE THE PETITIONER=S PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS,
DENYING PETITIONER A CERTIFICATE OF APPEAL ABILITY AND
PERMISSION TO APPEAL IN FORMA PAUPERIS AND TERMINATING CASE.
______________________________________________________________________________

This is a habeas corpus case under 28 U.S.C. 2254. On 2/07/18, Magistrate Judge
Michael R. Merz filed a Report and Recommendations (Doc.48) recommending Petitioner=s
Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus be dismissed with prejudice. In response Petitioner filed
Objections (Doc.56) to said Report and Recommendations. This Court recommitted the case to
the Magistrate Judge for reconsideration in light of those Objections. On 5/09/18 Magistrate
Judge Merz filed a Supplemental Report and Recommendations (Doc. 58) again recommending
a dismissal with prejudice of the Petitioner=s Petition. Petitioner again filed Objections (Doc. 63)
to the Magistrate Judge=s Supplemental Report and Recommendations. This Court for a second
time recommitted the case to the Magistrate Judge for reconsideration in light of the Objections.
On 7/06/18 Magistrate Judge Merz filed a Second Supplemental Report and Recommendations

(Doc.65) again recommending a dismissal with prejudice of the Petitioner=s Petition to which
Petitioner again has Objected (Doc 70).
The Court has reviewed the comprehensive findings of the Magistrate Judge in all three
of his Report and Recommendations (Doc. 48,58 and 65) as well as the Petitioner=s Objections
(Doc 56, 63 and 70) to those Reports and Recommendations. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b) and
Fed. R. Civ. 72(b) this District Judge has made a de novo review of the record in this case and
upon consideration of the foregoing, the Court finds the Objections (Doc. 56,63 and 70) are not
well taken and hereby OVERRULED.
THEREFORE, the Court adopts the Magistrate Judge=s Report and Recommendations
(Doc. 48), Supplemental Report and Recommendations (Doc. 58) and Second Supplemental
Report and Recommendations and ORDERS Defendant=s Section 2254 Petition be DISMISSED
WITH PREJUDICE. The Court also finds reasonable jurists would not disagree with this
conclusion and DENIES Defendant a certificate of appealability and permission to appeal in
forma pauperis. The Clerk is ORDERED to terminate the instant case.
DONE and ORDERED this 18th day of December, 2018.

*s/Thomas M. Rose
_________________________________
THOMAS M. ROSE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE