Duncan v. Warden USP-Allenwood, 1:18-cv-1143. (2019)
Court: District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania
Number: infdco20190401g60
Visitors: 7
Filed: Mar. 29, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 29, 2019
Summary: ORDER SYLVIA H. RAMBO , District Judge . Before the court is a report and recommendation of the magistrate judge (Doc. 12) in which he recommends that Michael Duncan's Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) be denied as unexhausted and meritless. Objections to the report and recommendation were due on March 26, 2019, but no such objections have been filed. In considering whether to adopt the Report and Recommendation, the court should, as a matter of good practice, "satisfy itself
Summary: ORDER SYLVIA H. RAMBO , District Judge . Before the court is a report and recommendation of the magistrate judge (Doc. 12) in which he recommends that Michael Duncan's Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) be denied as unexhausted and meritless. Objections to the report and recommendation were due on March 26, 2019, but no such objections have been filed. In considering whether to adopt the Report and Recommendation, the court should, as a matter of good practice, "satisfy itself t..
More
ORDER
SYLVIA H. RAMBO, District Judge.
Before the court is a report and recommendation of the magistrate judge (Doc. 12) in which he recommends that Michael Duncan's Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) be denied as unexhausted and meritless. Objections to the report and recommendation were due on March 26, 2019, but no such objections have been filed.
In considering whether to adopt the Report and Recommendation, the court should, as a matter of good practice, "satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation." Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), advisory committee notes; see also Univac Dental Co. v. Dentsply Intern., Inc., 702 F.Supp.2d 465, 469 (M.D. Pa. 2010) (explaining that judges should review dispositive legal issues raised by the report for clear error). Following an independent review of the record, the court is satisfied that the report and recommendation contains no clear error, and will therefore adopt the recommendation to deny the petition both as unexhausted and meritless. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:
1. The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 12) is ADOPTED.
2. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) is DENIED.
3. The Clerk of Court shall CLOSE this case.
4. A certificate of appealability shall not issue as any appeal taken from this order is deemed both frivolous and not in good faith.
Source: Leagle
