Deaton v. Farris et al

Filing 24

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION for 22 Report and Recommendation, Amended Petition for Habeas Corpus Relief is DENIED, as more fully set out. Signed by Honorable David L. Russell on 6/21/16. (jw)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
LOGAN ADAM DEATON,
Petitioner,
v.
JIM FARRIS, Warden,

Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CIV-13-1052-R

ORDER
Petitioner, appearing pro se, filed this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging his
conviction in the District Court of Cleveland County on a charge of First Degree Rape. Pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and (C) the matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Bernard
M. Jones for preliminary review. On May 31, 2016, Judge Jones issued a Report and
Recommendation wherein he recommended the Petition be denied on the merits. The matter is
currently before the Court on Petitioner’s timely objection to the Report and Recommendation,
giving rise to the Court’s obligation to conduct a de novo review of any portion of the Report and
Recommendation to which Petitioner makes specific objection. Having conducted this de novo
review, the Court finds as follows.
As noted by Judge Jones, Petitioner raised nine grounds for relief in his Petition. The Report
and Recommendation thoroughly addresses each of the claims and correctly concludes that the
decision of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals was not contrary to or an unreasonable
application of clearly established federal law, so as to entitle Petitioner to habeas relief. See 28
U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1). The Court hereby ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation in its ENTIRETY
and the Amended Petition for Habeas Corpus Relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 is hereby

DENIED. Judgment shall be entered accordingly.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 21st day of June, 2016.