Richmond v. LaRose, No. 1:2016cv00472 - Document 15 (N.D. Ohio 2019)

Court Description: Memorandum Opinion and Order For the reasons set forth herein, the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is hereby adopted. Demetrius Richmond's Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus will be dismissed.The Court certifies that there is no basis upon which to issue a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b). Judge Benita Y. Pearson on 1/29/2019. Related document(s) 10 . (S,Ke)

Download PDF
Richmond v. LaRose Doc. 15 PEARSON, J. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION DEMETRIUS RICHMOND, Petitioner, v. CHRISTOPHER LAROSE, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CASE NO. 1:16CV472 JUDGE BENITA Y. PEARSON MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER Petitioner Demetrius Richmond filed a Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (ECF No. 1) alleging fifteen grounds for relief. Each ground for relief challenges or purports to challenge the constitutionality of his conviction and sentence in the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Case No. CR-10-540291-A. A Cuyahoga County Grand Jury indicted Petitioner on seven counts of endangering children, one count of felonious assault, one count of domestic violence, one count of rape, and one count of kidnapping. Petitioner was convicted on all counts. Petitioner was sentenced to 28 years in prison. The case was referred to Magistrate Judge George J. Limbert for preparation of a report and recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Local Rule 72.2(b)(2). On December 11, 2018, the magistrate judge issued a Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 10). In his report, the magistrate judge recommends that the Court dismiss the habeas petition in its entirety for the following reasons: “Petitioner’s first, second, third, fifth, seventh, ninth, eleventh, twelfth, Dockets.Justia.com (1:16CV472) thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth grounds for relief are not cognizable in federal habeas review. Petitioner’s sixth ground for relief is waived. The fourth, eighth, and tenth grounds for relief raised by Petitioner fail on the merits.” ECF No. 10 at PageID#: 1632. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2) provides that objections to a report and recommendation must be filed within 14 days after service. In this case, the Court granted Petitioner a 15-day extension to file objections. Objections to the Report were due, therefore, on January 9, 2019. To date, neither party has filed any such objections. The Court concludes, therefore, that the parties are satisfied with the magistrate judge’s recommendations. Any further review would be duplicative and an inefficient use of the Court’s limited resources. Thomas v. Arn, 728 F.2d 813 (6th Cir. 1984), aff’d, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); Howard v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 932 F.2d 505 (6th Cir. 1991); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 949-50 (6th Cir. 1981). Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation of the magistrate judge is hereby adopted. Demetrius Richmond’s Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus will be dismissed. The Court certifies that there is no basis upon which to issue a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b). IT IS SO ORDERED. January 29, 2019 Date /s/ Benita Y. Pearson Benita Y. Pearson United States District Judge

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.