Evans v. Bryant et al

Filing 10

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 9 of Magistrate Judge Bernard Jones; the court concludes that petitioner's ineffective assistance claim is not procedurally barred; this matter is referred again to Magistrate Judge Jones for further review of petitioner's claim. Signed by Honorable Joe Heaton on 04/20/2016. (lam)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
WILLIAM DAVID EVANS, JR.,
Petitioner,
vs.
JOE M. ALLBAUGH, Interim Director,
Oklahoma Department of Corrections,
Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

NO. CIV-14-0576-HE

ORDER
Petitioner William David Evans, Jr., a state prisoner appearing pro se, filed this action
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 seeking habeas relief. Consistent with 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1)(B)
and C, the matter was referred to Magistrate Judge Bernard M. Jones for initial proceedings.
The magistrate judge recommends that the defense of procedural bar raised by respondent
in his response to the habeas petition be denied and that consideration of the merits of the
sole claim petitioner asserts in the petition – ineffective assistance of counsel – be deferred
pending supplementation of the record and further briefing.
Neither party objected to the Report and Recommendation. They thereby waived their
right to appellate review of the factual and legal issues it addressed. United States v. One
Parcel of Real Property, 73 F.3d 1057, 1059-60 (10th Cir. 1996); see 28 U.S.C.
§636(b)(1)(C).
Accordingly, the court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Jones’s Report and
Recommendation and concludes that petitioner’s ineffective assistance claim is not
procedurally barred. The matter is referred again to Judge Jones for further review of

petitioner’s claim.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated this 20th day of April, 2016.

2