RUSSELL v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, 3:13cv519/LAC/EMT. (2015)
Court: District Court, N.D. Florida
Number: infdco20150514950
Visitors: 3
Filed: May 13, 2015
Latest Update: May 13, 2015
Summary: ORDER LACEY A. COLLIER , Senior District Judge . This cause comes on for consideration upon the chief magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation dated April 24, 2015 (doc. 39). 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 the objections filed. Having considered the Report and Recommendation, and the time
Summary: ORDER LACEY A. COLLIER , Senior District Judge . This cause comes on for consideration upon the chief magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation dated April 24, 2015 (doc. 39). 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 the objections filed. Having considered the Report and Recommendation, and the timel..
More
ORDER
LACEY A. COLLIER, Senior District Judge.
This cause comes on for consideration upon the chief magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation dated April 24, 2015 (doc. 39). 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 the objections filed.
Having considered the Report and Recommendation, and the timely filed objections thereto, I have determined that the Report and Recommendation should be adopted.
Accordingly, it is now ORDERED as follows:
1. The chief magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation is adopted and incorporated by reference in this order.
2. The petition for writ of habeas corpus (doc. 1) is DENIED.
3. Petitioner's "Motion to Request/Compel Discovery" (doc. 35) and "Request for an Evidentiary Hearing with his Suggestions in Support" (doc. 37) are DENIED.
4. A certificate of appealability is DENIED.
DONE AND ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
