Filed: Jul. 16, 2012
Latest Update: Jul. 16, 2012
Summary: ORDER M. CASEY RODGERS, Chief District Judge. This cause comes on for consideration upon the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation dated June 7, 2012. (Doc. 42). The parties have been furnished a copy of the Report and Recommendation and have been afforded an opportunity to file objections pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1). I have made a de novo determination of petitioner's timely filed objections. (Doc. 48). Having considered the Report and Recommendation
Summary: ORDER M. CASEY RODGERS, Chief District Judge. This cause comes on for consideration upon the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation dated June 7, 2012. (Doc. 42). The parties have been furnished a copy of the Report and Recommendation and have been afforded an opportunity to file objections pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1). I have made a de novo determination of petitioner's timely filed objections. (Doc. 48). Having considered the Report and Recommendation,..
More
ORDER
M. CASEY RODGERS, Chief District Judge.
This cause comes on for consideration upon the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation dated June 7, 2012. (Doc. 42). The parties have been furnished a copy of the Report and Recommendation and have been afforded an opportunity to file objections pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1). I have made a de novo determination of petitioner's timely filed objections. (Doc. 48).
Having considered the Report and Recommendation, and any objections thereto timely filed, I have determined that the Report and Recommendation should be adopted.
Accordingly, it is now ORDERED as follows:
1. The magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation is adopted and incorporated by reference in this order.
2. Respondent's motion to dismiss amended habeas petition as untimely (doc. 37) is GRANTED.
3. The amended petition for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 is DISMISSED as untimely and a certificate of appealability is DENIED pursuant to Rule 11 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts.
4. Petitioner's motion for evidentiary hearing (doc. 47) is DENIED.
DONE and ORDERED.
