MBACKE v. JONES, 1:13CV937. (2016)
Court: District Court, E.D. North Carolina
Number: infdco20160308b51
Visitors: 7
Filed: Mar. 07, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 07, 2016
Summary: ORDER LORETTA C. BIGGS , District Judge . The Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge was filed with the Court in accordance with 28 U.S.C. 636(b) and, on January 14, 2016 was served on the parties in this action. (ECF Nos. 19, 20.) Petitioner objected to the Recommendation. (ECF No. 21.) The Court has appropriately reviewed the portions of the Magistrate Judge's report to which objection was made and has made a de novo determination which is in accord with the Magistrate
Summary: ORDER LORETTA C. BIGGS , District Judge . The Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge was filed with the Court in accordance with 28 U.S.C. 636(b) and, on January 14, 2016 was served on the parties in this action. (ECF Nos. 19, 20.) Petitioner objected to the Recommendation. (ECF No. 21.) The Court has appropriately reviewed the portions of the Magistrate Judge's report to which objection was made and has made a de novo determination which is in accord with the Magistrate J..
More
ORDER
LORETTA C. BIGGS, District Judge.
The Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge was filed with the Court in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and, on January 14, 2016 was served on the parties in this action. (ECF Nos. 19, 20.) Petitioner objected to the Recommendation. (ECF No. 21.)
The Court has appropriately reviewed the portions of the Magistrate Judge's report to which objection was made and has made a de novo determination which is in accord with the Magistrate Judge's report. The Court hereby adopts the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Respondent's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 14) be GRANTED, that the Petition (ECF No. 1) be DENIED, and that this action be dismissed with prejudice. A Judgment dismissing this action will be entered contemporaneously with this Order. Finding no substantial issue for appeal concerning the denial of a constitutional right affecting the conviction, nor a debatable procedural ruling, a certificate of appealability is not issued.
Source: Leagle
