Filed: May 31, 2018
Latest Update: May 31, 2018
Summary: ORDER JUAN R. SANCHEZ , District Judge . AND NOW, this 31st day of May, 2018, upon careful and independent consideration of Petitioner Brett Martin Peters's pro se Petition Under 28 U.S.C. 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus, the response thereto, and the additional briefing filed by Peters, and after review of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Elizabeth T. Hey, to which no objections have been filed, 1 it is ORDERED: 1. The Report and Recommendation (Document
Summary: ORDER JUAN R. SANCHEZ , District Judge . AND NOW, this 31st day of May, 2018, upon careful and independent consideration of Petitioner Brett Martin Peters's pro se Petition Under 28 U.S.C. 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus, the response thereto, and the additional briefing filed by Peters, and after review of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Elizabeth T. Hey, to which no objections have been filed, 1 it is ORDERED: 1. The Report and Recommendation (Document 2..
More
ORDER
JUAN R. SANCHEZ, District Judge.
AND NOW, this 31st day of May, 2018, upon careful and independent consideration of Petitioner Brett Martin Peters's pro se Petition Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus, the response thereto, and the additional briefing filed by Peters, and after review of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Elizabeth T. Hey, to which no objections have been filed,1 it is ORDERED:
1. The Report and Recommendation (Document 20) is APPROVED and ADOPTED;
2. Peters's petition for writ of habeas corpus is DENIED; and
3. A certificate of appealability shall not issue, as Peters has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 483-84 (2000).
The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to mark this case CLOSED.
FootNotes
1. The Report and Recommendation was sent to all parties of record on January 19, 2018, together with a Notice from the Clerk of Court advising the parties of their obligation to file any objections within 14 days after service of the Notice. See Local R. Civ. P. 72.1 IV(b) ("Any party may object to a magistrate judge's proposed findings, recommendations or report under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), and subsections 1(c) and (d) of this Rule within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy thereof."). Peters thereafter requested an extension of time to file objections to the Report and Recommendation, and by Order of February 20, 2018, this Court granted the request in part, allowing Peters an additional 60 days, until April 23, 2018, to file objections. As of today's date, however, no objections have been filed.
