Chapin v. Clipper, No. 1:2011cv01554 - Document 18 (N.D. Ohio 2012)

Court Description: Memorandum Opinion and Order Adopting 16 Report and Recommendation and denying thepetition for writ of habeas corpus (Doc. # 1 ). Judge Dan A. Polster(C,KA)

Download PDF
Chapin v. Clipper Doc. 18 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION JONATHAN CHAPIN, Petitioner, vs. KIMBERLY CLIPPER, Warden, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CASE NO. 1:11CV1554 JUDGE DAN AARON POLSTER MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge James R. Knepp II (“R & R”) (Doc. # 16), dated August 3, 2012. The R&R recommends that Petitioner Jonathan Chapin’s 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition for writ of habeas corpus (Doc. # 1) be denied. Under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) a habeas petitioner has 14 days after being served a copy of the R&R to file written objections. On August 3, the day the R&R was filed, a copy was mailed to the institution in which Petitioner was being held: Grafton Correctional. The mail was returned to sender because, as it turned out, Petitioner had been released on December 7, 2011, and he is now on post-release supervision. Petitioner did not, however, provide a forwarding address, so a copy of the R&R has not been successfully served on him. Still, it is the prisoner’s responsibility to provide a forwarding address, not the Court’s job to track him down. Today is September 13; the deadline for filing objections has passed, and no objections have been filed. The failure to timely file written objections to a Magistrate Judge’s R&R constitutes a waiver of the right to obtain a de novo review of the R&R in the district court. Id.; United States Dockets.Justia.com v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 949 (6th Cir. 1981). The failure to file written objections also results in a waiver of the right to appeal. Thomas v. Arn, 728 F.2d 813 (6th Cir. 1984), aff’d, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). The Court has reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s thorough and well-written R & R. The Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge that Petitioner’s sole claim should be denied. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge’s R&R (Doc. # 16) and DENIES the petition for writ of habeas corpus (Doc. # 1). IT IS SO ORDERED. /s/ Dan Aaron Polster September 13, 2012 Dan Aaron Polster United States District Judge -2-

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.