Filed: Aug. 06, 2018
Latest Update: Aug. 06, 2018
Summary: ORDER JUAN R. S NCHEZ , District Judge . AND NOW, this 6th day of August, 2018, upon careful and independent consideration of Petitioner Maurice Harper's pro se Petition Under 28 U.S.C. 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus, the response in opposition thereto, Harper's reply, and the available state court records, and after review of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge David R. Strawbridge, to which no objections have been filed, 1 it is ORDERED: 1. The Report and
Summary: ORDER JUAN R. S NCHEZ , District Judge . AND NOW, this 6th day of August, 2018, upon careful and independent consideration of Petitioner Maurice Harper's pro se Petition Under 28 U.S.C. 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus, the response in opposition thereto, Harper's reply, and the available state court records, and after review of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge David R. Strawbridge, to which no objections have been filed, 1 it is ORDERED: 1. The Report and R..
More
ORDER
JUAN R. SÁNCHEZ, District Judge.
AND NOW, this 6th day of August, 2018, upon careful and independent consideration of Petitioner Maurice Harper's pro se Petition Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus, the response in opposition thereto, Harper's reply, and the available state court records, and after review of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge David R. Strawbridge, to which no objections have been filed,1 it is ORDERED:
1. The Report and Recommendation (Document 34) is APPROVED and ADOPTED;
2. Harper's petition for writ of habeas corpus is DENIED and DISMISSED; and
3. A certificate of appealability shall not issue, as Harper has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right nor demonstrated that reasonable jurists would debate the correctness of the procedural aspects of this ruling. 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 June 29, 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."). As of today's date, no objections have been filed.
