Henderson v. USA, No. 3:2013cv07254 - Document 1 (E.D. Ky. 2013)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: (1) that the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation [DE 59] is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED; (2) that Defendant's Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct His Sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 [Record No. 56] is DENIED; and (3) that no certificate of appealability will issue. Signed by Judge Joseph M. Hood on 5/28/2013.(AKR)cc: Paper copy to Dft via US Mail
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY CENTRAL DIVISION at FRANKFORT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL WAYNE HENDERSON, Defendant. Criminal Case No. 09-cr-11-JMH-CJS Civil Case No. 13-cv-7254-JMH-CJS MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER *** This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation entered by Magistrate Judge Candace J. Smith [DE 59]. Said action was referred to the magistrate for the purpose of reviewing the merit of Defendant s Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct His Sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 [DE 56]. the Upon a preliminary review of the Motion under Rule 4 of Rules States Governing District Section Court, the 2255 Proceedings magistrate judge for the United recommends that Defendant s Motion be dismissed as it is untimely and barred by the applicable statute of limitations. She further recommends that no Certificate of Appealability issue because no reasonable jurist would contest this Court s conclusion if the Report and Recommendation is adopted by the undersigned. No objections to the Report and Recommendation have been filed. Generally, a judge of the court shall make a de novo determination of those or portions proposed findings judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636. of recommendations the report made by or the specified magistrate However, when the movant fails to file any objections to the Report and Recommendation, as in the case sub judice, [i]t does not appear that Congress intended to require district court review of a magistrate s factual or legal conclusions, under a de novo or any other standard. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985). Consequently, this Court adopts the reasoning set forth in the Report and Recommendation as its own. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED: (1) that the Magistrate Judge s Report and Recommendation [DE 59] is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED; (2) that Defendant s Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct His Sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 [Record No. 56] is DENIED; and (3) that no certificate of appealability will issue. This the 28th day of May, 2013.
]]>
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.
