OPINION AND ORDER

JAMES L. GRAHAM, District Judge.

On June 26, 2014, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that the instant petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 be dismissed on the grounds that Petitioner had failed to establish cause and prejudice for his procedural defaults or that his claims otherwise failed to provide a basis for relief. Petitioner has filed an objection to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation and a motion to appoint counsel. He objects to the Magistrate Judge's recommendation of dismissal. He again asserts that he is actually innocent and the victim of a manifest miscarriage of justice. The record, however, fails to support this allegation.

Petitioner presents no new evidence not previously available indicating that this case is of the "extraordinary nature" justifying a merits review of his otherwise procedurally defaulted claims. Souter v. Jones, 395 F.3d 577, 590 (6th Cir. 2005)(citing Schlup v. Delo, 513 U.S. 298, 316 (1995)). Further, to the extent that Petitioner raises an independent or free-standing claim of actual innocence, such claim does not provide him relief. Herrera v. Collins, 506 U.S. 390, 401 (1993)("Few rulings would be more disruptive of our federal system than to provide for federal habeas review of freestanding claims of actual innocence"); see also House v. Bell, 547 U.S. 518, 554-55 (2006)(declining to resolve the issue).

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), this Court has conducted a de novo review. Petitioner's objection (Doc. 56) is OVERRULED. Petitioner's motion for appointment of counsel (Doc. 57) is DENIED. The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 50) is ADOPTED and AFFIRMED. This action is hereby DISMISSED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.