Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Constance v. Cain, 15-00329-BAJ-RLB. (2018)

Court: District Court, M.D. Louisiana Number: infdco20180525587 Visitors: 8
Filed: May 21, 2018
Latest Update: May 21, 2018
Summary: RULING AND ORDER BRIAN A. JACKSON , Chief District Judge . Before the Court is the United States Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 19) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1). The Report and Recommendation addresses Petitioner, David Constance's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1). The pro se Petitioner, an inmate confined at the Louisiana State Penitentiary, Angola, Louisiana, filed this habeas corpus proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254, challenging his 2006 cri
More

RULING AND ORDER

Before the Court is the United States Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 19) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The Report and Recommendation addresses Petitioner, David Constance's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1). The pro se Petitioner, an inmate confined at the Louisiana State Penitentiary, Angola, Louisiana, filed this habeas corpus proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging his 2006 criminal conviction and sentence, entered in the Twenty-First Judicial District Court for the Parish of Livingston, State of Louisiana, on four counts of aggravated rape. (Id.). The Magistrate Judge recommended that "[P]etitioner's application for habeas corpus relief be denied, with prejudice, as untimely [sic],"1 and that in the event that Petitioner seeks to pursue an appeal, a certificate of appealability be denied. (Doc. 19 at p. 24).

The Report and Recommendation notified the parties that, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), they had fourteen (14) days from the date they received the Report and Recommendation to file written objections to the proposed findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations therein. (Id. at p. 1). Plaintiff filed a timely Objection. (Doc. 20). Having carefully and independently considered the underlying Complaint, the instant motions, and related filings, the Court approves the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, and hereby adopts its findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendation.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 19) is ADOPTED as the Court's opinion herein.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) is hereby DENIED WITH PREJUDICE.

FootNotes


1. The Court notes, and has confirmed, that there is an obvious typographical error in the Magistrate Judge's recommendation finding that the Petition was untimely filed. (Doc. 19 at p. 24). The timeliness of the petition is not, and was not, an issue in this matter. Furthermore, Petitioner's Objection fully discusses all of the Magistrate Judge's proposed findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations. (see Doc. 20).
Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer