U.S. v. SANCHEZ-GARCIA, 2:10CR20024 (2013)
Court: District Court, W.D. Arkansas
Number: infdco20130614970
Visitors: 15
Filed: Jun. 13, 2013
Latest Update: Jun. 13, 2013
Summary: ORDER ROBERT T. DAWSON, District Judge. Now on this 13th day of June 2013, there comes on for consideration the report and recommendation filed herein on March 21, 2013, by the Honorable James R. Marschewski, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. (Doc. 205). Also before the Court are Petitioner's Reply to the Government's response to his 2255 motion and written objections to the report and recommendation (doc. 212). The report and recommendation was issued in
Summary: ORDER ROBERT T. DAWSON, District Judge. Now on this 13th day of June 2013, there comes on for consideration the report and recommendation filed herein on March 21, 2013, by the Honorable James R. Marschewski, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. (Doc. 205). Also before the Court are Petitioner's Reply to the Government's response to his 2255 motion and written objections to the report and recommendation (doc. 212). The report and recommendation was issued in ..
More
ORDER
ROBERT T. DAWSON, District Judge.
Now on this 13th day of June 2013, there comes on for consideration the report and recommendation filed herein on March 21, 2013, by the Honorable James R. Marschewski, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. (Doc. 205). Also before the Court are Petitioner's Reply to the Government's response to his § 2255 motion and written objections to the report and recommendation (doc. 212).
The report and recommendation was issued in this matter prior to Petitioner's Reply. According to Petitioner, he failed to receive a copy of the Government's Response to his § 2255 motion which did not become apparent until he received the report and recommendation. Petitioner moved the Court to stay ruling on the report and recommendation until he had an opportunity to file a reply brief, as well as his objections to the report and recommendation. The Court agreed, and this matter is ready for decision.
The court has reviewed this case de novo and, being well and sufficiently advised, finds as follows: The report and recommendation is proper and should be and hereby is adopted in its entirety. Accordingly, the 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion (Doc. 20) is DENIED and DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
