Pough v. Clarke

Filing 11

FINAL ORDER. The Court ADOPTS and APPROVES the 10 Report and Recommendation in its entirety as the Court's own opinion. Accordingly, the Respondent's 6 Motion to Dismiss, is GRANTED, and the 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DE NIED and DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. It is ORDERED that judgment be entered in favor of the Respondent. The Clerk is DIRECTED to forward a copy of this Order to Petitioner and counsel of record for the Respondent. Signed by District Judge Arenda L. Wright Allen on 1/20/2017. Copies mailed 1/20/2017. (jmey, )

FILED
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
Norfolk Division

JAN
CLERK, U.S. DISTfilCT COURT
NORFOLK VA

RODNEY SINCLAIR POUGH,
Petitioner,
V.

ACTION NO. 2:16-cv-272

HAROLD W. CLARKE, Director,

Virginia Department of Corrections,
Respondent.
FINAL ORDER

Before the Court is a petition for a writ of habeas corpus (ECF No. 1) filed pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 2254, and the Respondent's motion to dismiss (ECF No. 6). On September 9, 2005, in
the Louisa County Circuit Court, the Petitioner was convicted of attempted capital murder of a
law enforcement officer, use of a firearm in the commission of a felony, maliciously shooting at
an emergency vehicle, and felony eluding of a law enforcement officer.

The Petitioner was

sentenced to twenty-five years and six months of incarceration. In his Petition, the pro se
Petitioner challenges the constitutionality of this conviction and sentence.
The matter was referred for disposition to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to
28 U.S.C. §§ 636(b)(l)(B)-(C), Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), Local Civil Rule 72, and
the April 2, 2002 Standing Order on Assignment of Certain Matters to United States Magistrate
Judges.

In a Report and Recommendation entered on December 9, 2016 (ECF No. 10), the

Magistrate Judge recommended the motion to dismiss be granted, and the Petition be dismissed
with prejudice. The parties were advised of their right to file written objections to the Report and
Recommendation. Neither the Petitioner nor the Respondent filed objections with the Court.

Having reviewed the record and having heard no objection, the Court agrees with the
Report and Recommendation on the grounds stated by the Magistrate Judge and ADOPTS and
APPROVES the Report and Recommendation (ECF No, 10) in its entirety as the Court's own
opinion. Accordingly, the Respondent's motion to dismiss (ECF No. 6) is GRANTED, and the
Petition (ECF No. 1) is DENIED and DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. It is ORDERED

that judgment be entered in favor of the Respondent.

The Petitioner is hereby notified that he may appeal from the judgment entered pursuant
to this Final Order by filing a written notice of appeal with the Clerk of the Court at the Walter

E. Hoffman United States Courthouse, 600 Granby Street, Norfolk, Virginia 23510, within thirty
(30) days from the dale judgment is entered. Because the Petitioner has failed to demonstrate a

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) and
Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 22(b)(1), the Court declines to issue a certificate of
appealability. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 335-36 (2003).
The Clerk is DIRECTED to forward a copy of this Order to the Petitioner and counsel of
record for the Respondent.
It is so ORDERED.

Arenda L. Wright-Atlen

United States District Judge
Arenda L. Wright Allen
United States District Judge
Norfolk, Virginia

Januaryp^^^O17