Johnson v. Payne County District Court et al
Filing
16
ORDER ADOPTING 11 Report and Recommendation, DISMISSING action without prejudice, DENYING Certificate of Appealability. Signed by Honorable Stephen P. Friot on 7/7/14. (llg)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
JEFFERY JOHNSON,
Petitioner,
vs.
DISTRICT COURT OF PAYNE CO.,
et al.,
Respondents.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. CIV-14-0331-F
ORDER
Petitioner, a state prisoner appearing pro se, seeks habeas relief in this action.
Magistrate Judge Shon T. Erwin entered a Report and Recommendation (the Report),
recommending the petition be dismissed without prejudice because petitioner failed
to pay the filing fee, petitioner failed to properly apply to proceed without paying the
filing fee, and because petitioner failed to comply with the court’s orders. Doc. no.
11.
The Report advised petitioner of his right to file an objection to the
recommendations contained in the Report by June 2, 2014, and advised that failure to
timely object waives the right to appellate review of both factual and legal issues
contained in the Report. No objection has been filed, and no request for an extension
of time within which to object has been filed.1 With no objection having been filed
and with the filing fee remaining unpaid, the court, after review, ACCEPTS,
ADOPTS, and AFFIRMS the Report and Recommendation of the magistrate judge.
1
Various letters have been submitted and filed, including one from petitioner indicating his
girlfriend will send a $5.00 money order for the second time, and one from petitioner’s girlfriend
stating she has the money stub from the first $5.00 submission and that she is going to send another
$5.00 The filing fee, however, remains unpaid.
This action is DISMISSED without prejudice. A certificate of appealability is
DENIED.
Dated this 7th day of July, 2014.
14-331p001.wpd
-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?