MINOR v. WARDEN, LEBANON CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, 1:08-cv-583. (2015)
Court: District Court, S.D. Ohio
Number: infdco20150121a95
Visitors: 12
Filed: Jan. 20, 2015
Latest Update: Jan. 20, 2015
Summary: DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING THE REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (Docs. 45, 48) TIMOTHY S. BLACK, District Judge. This case is before the Court pursuant to the Order of General Reference in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio Western Division to United States Magistrate Judge Michael Merz. Pursuant to such reference, the Magistrate Judge reviewed the pleadings filed with this Court and, on March 27, 2014, submitted a Report and Re
Summary: DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING THE REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (Docs. 45, 48) TIMOTHY S. BLACK, District Judge. This case is before the Court pursuant to the Order of General Reference in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio Western Division to United States Magistrate Judge Michael Merz. Pursuant to such reference, the Magistrate Judge reviewed the pleadings filed with this Court and, on March 27, 2014, submitted a Report and Rec..
More
DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING THE REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (Docs. 45, 48)
TIMOTHY S. BLACK, District Judge.
This case is before the Court pursuant to the Order of General Reference in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio Western Division to United States Magistrate Judge Michael Merz. Pursuant to such reference, the Magistrate Judge reviewed the pleadings filed with this Court and, on March 27, 2014, submitted a Report and Recommendations. (Doc. 45). Subsequently, pursuant to Order, the Magistrate Judge filed a Supplemental Report and Recommendations (Doc. 48) addressing Petitioner's Objections (Doc. 46).
As required by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), the Court has reviewed the comprehensive findings of the Magistrate Judge and considered de novo all of the filings in this matter. Upon consideration of the foregoing, the Court does determine that such Report and Recommendations should be and is hereby adopted in its entirety. Accordingly:
1. The Report and Recommendations (Doc. 45, 48) is ADOPTED;
2. Petitioner's petition for a writ of habeas corpus (Doc. 2) is DISMISSED with prejudice as barred by the statute of limitations and Petitioner's procedural default.
3. Because reasonable jurists could disagree on the persuasiveness of the Hicks affidavit, Petitioner is GRANTED a certificate of appealability under 28 U.S.C. § 2253 as to his actual innocence claim. As reasonable jurists would not disagree that the balance of Petitioner's claims should be dismissed, such certificate is DENIED as to such claims.
4. An application to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. Section 1915(a)(3) is DENIED.
5. The Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly, whereupon this case is TERMINATED in this Court.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
