MORRISON v. U.S., 2:11-CR-0023. (2014)
Court: District Court, S.D. Ohio
Number: infdco20140428d55
Filed: Apr. 25, 2014
Latest Update: Apr. 25, 2014
Summary: ORDER GREGORY L. FROST, District Judge. On April 4, 2014, the United States Magistrate Judge recommended that counsel be appointed to represent Petitioner at an evidentiary hearing on his claims that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel because his attorney failed to file an appeal on his behalf and failed to consult with him regarding the filing of an appeal, and because he performed in a constitutionally ineffective manner during pre-trial proceedings. (ECF 68.) The Magistrate
Summary: ORDER GREGORY L. FROST, District Judge. On April 4, 2014, the United States Magistrate Judge recommended that counsel be appointed to represent Petitioner at an evidentiary hearing on his claims that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel because his attorney failed to file an appeal on his behalf and failed to consult with him regarding the filing of an appeal, and because he performed in a constitutionally ineffective manner during pre-trial proceedings. (ECF 68.) The Magistrate J..
More
ORDER
GREGORY L. FROST, District Judge.
On April 4, 2014, the United States Magistrate Judge recommended that counsel be appointed to represent Petitioner at an evidentiary hearing on his claims that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel because his attorney failed to file an appeal on his behalf and failed to consult with him regarding the filing of an appeal, and because he performed in a constitutionally ineffective manner during pre-trial proceedings. (ECF 68.) The Magistrate Judge further recommended that the remainder of Petitioner's claims be dismissed. Id.
Although the parties were advised of the right to object to the Report and Recommendation and of the consequences of their failure to do so, no objections have been filed. The Report and Recommendation is therefore ADOPTED and AFFIRMED. (ECF No. 68.)
Counsel shall be appointed to represent Petitioner at an evidentiary hearing on his claims that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel because his attorney failed to file an appeal on his behalf and failed to consult with him regarding the filing of an appeal, and because he performed in a constitutionally ineffective manner during pre-trial proceedings. The remainder of Petitioner's claims are DISMISSED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
