Rheaume v. Pallito

Filing 11

ORDER ADOPTING 9 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: 4 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2254) is DENIED, 7 Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED, 5 Motion for Summary Judgment and 6 Motion Regarding Exhibits are DENIED as moot. A certificate of appealabi lity is DENIED because the petitioner has failed to make a substantial showing of denial of a federal right. Furthermore, it is certified that any appeal of this matter would not be taken in good faith, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). Signed by Judge William K. Sessions III on 8/17/2011. (law)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE
DISTRICT OF VERMONT
Allen Rheaume,
Petitioner,

:
:
:
: File No. 2:11 CV 38
:
:
:

v.
Andrew Pallito,
Respondent.
ORDER

The Report and Recommendation of the United States
Magistrate

Judge

was

filed

August

1,

2011.

Petitioner’s

objection were filed on August 12, 2011.
A district judge must make a de novo determination of
those portions of a magistrate judge's report and recommendation
to which an objection is made.

Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); 28 U.S.C.

§ 636(b) (1); Perez-Rubio v. Wyckoff, 718 F.Supp. 217, 227
(S.D.N.Y. 1989).

The district judge may "accept, reject, or

modify, in whole or in part, the magistrate's proposed findings
and recommendations."

Id.

After careful review of the file, the Magistrate Judge's
Report and Recommendation and the objections, this
Court ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge's recommendations in full.
The petitioner’s habeas corpus petition (Doc. 4), filed
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 is DENIED.
dismiss (Doc. 7) is GRANTED.

Respondent’s motion to

In addition, Petitioner’s motion

for summary judgment (Doc. 5) and motion regarding exhibits
1

(Doc. 6) are DENIED as moot.
Pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 22(b), a certificate of
appealability is DENIED because the petitioner has failed to
make a substantial showing of denial of a federal right.
Furthermore, the petitioner’s grounds for relief do not present
issues which are debatable among jurists of reasons, which could
have

been

resolved

proceedings.

differently,

or

which

deserve

further

See e.g., Flieger v. Delo, 16 F.3rd 878, 882-83

(8th Cir.) cert. denied, 513 U.S. 946 (1994); Sawyer v. Collins,
986 F.2d 1493, 1497 (5th cir.), cert. denied, 508 U.S. 933
(1993).
Furthermore, it is certified that any appeal of this matter
would not be taken in good faith, pursuant to

28 U.S.C. §

1915(a)(3).
THIS CASE IS CLOSED.
Dated at Burlington, in the District of Vermont, this 17th
day of August, 2011.

/s/ William K. Sessions III
William K. Sessions III
District Court Judge

2