Nelson v. Warden, Chillicothe Correctional Institution

Filing 19

ENTRY AND ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTIONS 15 , 18 , ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 AND SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 17 , GRANTING RESPONDENT'S MOTION TO DISMISS 10 , DISMISSING WITH PREJUDICE PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS 1 , AND TERMINATING CASE. Signed by Judge Thomas M. Rose on 9-11-2017. (de)(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 WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON FREDERICK NELSON, : Case No. 3:17-cv-62 : Petitioner, : Judge Thomas M. Rose : v. : : CHARLOTTE JENKINS, Warden, : Chillicothe Correctional Institution, : : Respondent. : ______________________________________________________________________________ ENTRY AND ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTIONS (DOCS. 15, 18), ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS (DOC. 14) AND SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS (DOC. 17), GRANTING RESPONDENT’S MOTION TO DISMISS (DOC. 10), DISMISSING WITH PREJUDICE PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS (DOC. 1), AND TERMINATING CASE ______________________________________________________________________________ This case is before the Court on the Objections (Docs. 15, 18) filed by Petitioner Frederick Nelson (“Nelson”) to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendations (“Report”) (Doc. 14) and Supplemental Report and Recommendations (Doc. 17), respectively. In the Report and Supplemental Report, Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz considered the Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 10) filed by Respondent, Warden of the Chillicothe Correctional Institution (“Warden”), and concluded that Nelson’s Petition Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for a Writ of Habeas Corpus (“Petition”) (Doc. 1) is barred by the statute of limitations. Accordingly, Magistrate Judge Merz recommended that the Court grant the Motion to Dismiss and dismiss the Petition with prejudice. As required by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), the Court has made a de novo review of the record in this case. Upon said review, the Court finds that Nelson’s Objections (Docs. 15, 18) to the Report (Doc. 14) and Supplemental Report (Doc. 17), respectively, are not well-taken and they are hereby OVERRULED. The Court ADOPTS the Report (Doc. 14) and Supplemental Report (Doc. 17) in their entirety, GRANTS the Warden’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 10), and DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE the Petition (Doc. 1) as barred by the statute of limitations. Because reasonable jurists would not disagree with this conclusion, the Court denies any requested certificate of appealability and certifies to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit that any appeal would be objectively frivolous and should not be permitted to proceed in forma pauperis. The Clerk shall TERMINATE this case on the Court’s docket. DONE and ORDERED in Dayton, Ohio, this Monday, September 11, 2017. s/Thomas M. Rose ________________________________ THOMAS M. ROSE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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?