Searcy v. Clarke

Filing 23

FINAL ORDER. The Court does hereby ADOPT and APPROVE the findings and recommendations set forth in the Report and Recommendation filed December 10, 2015. It is, therefore, ORDERED that the Petition be DENIED and DISMISSED. It is further ORDERED that judgment be entered in favor of Respondent. Signed by District Judge Raymond A. Jackson on 1/25/2016. Copies mailed 1/28/2016. (jmey, )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
Norfolk Division

AARON CHRISTOPHER SEARCY, #1442048,
Petitioner,
v.

ACTION NO.

2:15cv80

HAROLD W. CLARKE,

Director, Virginia Dept. ofCorrections,
Respondent.

FINAL ORDER

Petitioner, a Virginia inmate, submitted a pro se Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus,

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. ECF No. 1. The Petition alleges violations of federal rights

pertaining to Petitioner's convictions in the Circuit Court for the City of Norfolk for robbery and
conspiracy, in violation of Virginia Code Sections 18.2-58 and 18.2-22, respectively. See ECF No.
14 attach. 2. As a result of the convictions, Petitioner was sentenced to thirty (30) years for

robbery, with twenty (20) years suspended, and twelve (12) months for conspiracy. Id.
The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to the provisions of
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and (C) and Rule 72 of the Rules of the United States District Court for

the Eastern District of Virginia for report and recommendation.

The Report and

Recommendation filed December 10, 2015, recommends dismissal of the Petition. ECF No. 18.
Each party was advised of his right to file written objections to the findings and recommendations

made by the Magistrate Judge.

On December 28, 2015, Respondent filed objections regarding

the Magistrate Judge's reasoning on the "timeliness" issue in the Report and Recommendation.

ECF No. 19. Also on December 28,2015, the Court received Petitioner's objections to the Report

and Recommendation, wherein he objected to the Magistrate Judge's ruling on the merits of
Petitioner's claims. ECF No. 21.

The Court, having reviewed the record and examined the objections filed by Petitioner to
the Report and Recommendation, and having made de novo findings with respect to the portions

objected to, does hereby ADOPT and APPROVE the findings and recommendations set forth in
the Report and Recommendation filed December 10, 2015. It is, therefore, ORDERED that the
Petition be DENIED and DISMISSED. It is further ORDERED that judgment be entered in
favor of Respondent.

Petitioner simply repeated the claims he made in his original petition, and failed to
demonstrate "a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right," therefore, the Court

declines to issue any certificate of appealability pursuant to Rule 22(b) of the Federal Rules of

Appellate Procedure. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 335-36 (2003). Petitioner is
hereby notified that he may appeal from thejudgment entered pursuant to this Final Order by filing
a written notice of appeal with the Clerk of this Court, United States Courthouse, 600 Granby

Street, Norfolk, Virginia 23510, within thirty days from the date of entry of such judgment.
The Clerk shall forward a copy of this Final Order to Petitioner and counsel of record for
Respondent.

1'niicd .Mutes District Judge
RAYMOND A. JACKSON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Norfolk, Virginia

January Jfa ,2016