Smoker v. Ray, No. 4:2010cv00065 - Document 11 (D. Mont. 2010)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 9 in full. Petitioner's 6 Motion for Appointment of Counse is DENIED. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus 1 is DISMISSED with prejudice as time-barred. A certificate of appealability is DENIED. Signed by Judge Sam E Haddon on 12/28/2010. Mailed to Smoker. (TAG, )

Download PDF
Smoker v. Ray Doc. 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT· . r;; , ; : . , FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA l, ,._, • - >. ,I, GREAT FALLS DIVISION JADE WILLIAM SMOKER, Petitioner, No. CV-IO-65-GF-SEH vs. ORDER WARDEN STEVE RAY; ATIORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF MONTANA, Respondent. On December 8, 2010, United States Magistrate Judge Keith Strong entered his Findings and Recommendations l in this matter, Petitioner filed objections on December 22,2010. The Court reviews de novo findings and recommendations to which objection is made. Upon de novo review ofthe record, I find no clear error in Judge Strong's Findings and Recommendations and adopt them in full. I Document No.9 Dockets.Justia.com The Court also considered de novo Judge Strong's ruling denying Petitioner's Motion for Appointment of Counsel which was issued by Text Order on November 16, 20 I 0, and restated in the Findings and Recommendations entered on December 8, 2010. Petitioner claims not to have received the Text Order. He does not dispute that he received the Findings and Recommendations of December 8, 2010. The appointment of counsel motion has nevertheless been accorded de novo review and has been found to be without merit. ORDERED: 1. Petitioner's Motion for Appointment ofCounse[2 is DENIED. 2. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus3 is DISMISSED with prejudice as time-barred. 3. A certificate of appealability is DENIED. 4. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor Respondent and against Petitioner. J.Ii, _ DATED this 2010. United States District Judge 2 Document No.6 ) Document No. 1 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.