Hawkins v. Warden, Ross Corectional, Inst., 2:17-CV-00466. (2018)
Court: District Court, S.D. Ohio
Number: infdco20180601f66
Visitors: 21
Filed: May 31, 2018
Latest Update: May 31, 2018
Summary: OPINION AND ORDER GEORGE C. SMITH , District Judge . On April 19, 2018, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") recommending that the petition for a writ of habeas corpus, (ECF No. 1), be denied. (ECF No. 15.) Petitioner sought and received leave to file his objections by May 21, 2018. (ECF No. 17.) Although the parties were advised of the right to object to the R&R, and of the consequences of failing to do so, no objections have been filed. The R&R (ECF No. 15) is t
Summary: OPINION AND ORDER GEORGE C. SMITH , District Judge . On April 19, 2018, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") recommending that the petition for a writ of habeas corpus, (ECF No. 1), be denied. (ECF No. 15.) Petitioner sought and received leave to file his objections by May 21, 2018. (ECF No. 17.) Although the parties were advised of the right to object to the R&R, and of the consequences of failing to do so, no objections have been filed. The R&R (ECF No. 15) is th..
More
OPINION AND ORDER
GEORGE C. SMITH, District Judge.
On April 19, 2018, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") recommending that the petition for a writ of habeas corpus, (ECF No. 1), be denied. (ECF No. 15.) Petitioner sought and received leave to file his objections by May 21, 2018. (ECF No. 17.) Although the parties were advised of the right to object to the R&R, and of the consequences of failing to do so, no objections have been filed. The R&R (ECF No. 15) is therefore, ADOPTED and AFFIRMED. The petition for a writ of habeas corpus (ECF No. 1) is DENIED and this case is DISMISSED.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A), the Court must also assess whether to issue a certificate of appealability. Rule 11 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Proceedings for the United States District Courts states that "[t]he district court must issue or deny a certificate of appealability when it enters a final order adverse to the applicant." However, Petitioner has waived the right to file an appeal by failing to file objections to the Magistrate Judge's recommendations. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 147 (1985); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 950 (6th Cir. 1981). The Court therefore DECLINES to issue a certificate of appealability.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
