Lane v. Coleman, No. 3:2011cv01178 - Document 12 (N.D. Ohio 2014)
Court Description: Memorandum Opinion and Order Adopting Report and Recommendation 11 . The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is denied. Furthermore, for the reasons stated in the Report and Recommendation, the Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith, and that there is no basis upon which to issue a certificate of appealability. Judge Patricia A. Gaughan(C,KA) Modified text 3/4/2014 (C,KA).
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Lane v. Coleman Doc. 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION Earnest Lane, Petitioner, vs. John Coleman, Warden, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CASE NO. 3:11 CV 1178 JUDGE PATRICIA A. GAUGHAN Memorandum of Opinion and Order Introduction This matter is before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Greg White (Doc. 11) which recommends denial of the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pending before the Court. Petitioner did not file objections to the Report and Recommendation. For the following reasons, the Report and Recommendation is ACCEPTED. Standard of Review Rule 8(b) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts provides, “The judge must determine de novo any proposed finding or 1 Dockets.Justia.com recommendation to which objection is made. The judge may accept, reject, or modify any proposed finding or recommendation.”When no objections have been filed this Court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation. See Advisory Committee Notes 1983 Addition to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72. Discussion Petitioner was sentenced in the Allen County Court of Common Pleas in October 2001 following a guilty plea to complicity to aggravated arson, complicity to aggravated robbery, and complicity to involuntary manslaughter. The Magistrate Judge found grounds one and five to be procedurally defaulted, and grounds two, three, and four to be without merit. The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation and has found no clear error. Accordingly, for the reasons stated in the Report and Recommendation, which is incorporated herein, the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is denied. Conclusion Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation is accepted. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is denied. Furthermore, for the reasons stated in the Report and Recommendation, the Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith, and 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. Date: 3/04/14 /s/Patricia A. Gaughan PATRICIA A. GAUGHAN 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.
