Billenstein v. Warden, Warren Correctional Institution, No. 3:2015cv01097 - Document 11 (N.D. Ohio 2016)

Court Description: Memorandum of Opinion and Order For the reasons set forth herein, the Court adopts the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 10 ). Petitioner Ryan Billenstein's Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus is dismissed. Th e 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). Judge Benita Y. Pearson on 8/31/2016. (JLG)

Download PDF
Billenstein v. Warden, Warren Correctional Institution Doc. 11 PEARSON, J. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION RYAN BILLENSTEIN, Petitioner, v. WARDEN, WARREN CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CASE NO. 3:15CV01097 JUDGE BENITA Y. PEARSON MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER Pro se Petitioner Ryan Billenstein filed a Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, see ECF No. 1. Petitioner asserts two grounds for relief, challenging the constitutional sufficiency of his conviction for: aggravated vehicular homicide, aggravated vehicular assault, and operating a vehicle while under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs of abuse. The trial court accepted Petitioner’s plea of no contest to these counts. On May 1, 2013, the trial court sentenced Petitioner to a total of thirteen years in prison. On July 28, 2015, the case was referred to Magistrate Judge Nancy Vecchiarelli for preparation of a report and recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Local Rule 72.2(b)(2). On September 24, 2015, Respondent filed a return of writ (ECF No. 9). Petitioner did not respond. On July 8, 2016, the Magistrate Judge submitted a report (ECF No. 10) recommending that the Court dismiss the Petition. Dockets.Justia.com (3:15CV01097) Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2) provides that objections to a report and recommendation must be filed within fourteen (14) days after service.1 Petitioner has not filed any objections to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. Any further review by the Court would be a duplicative and 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 Court adopts the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 10). Petitioner Ryan Billenstein’s Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus is dismissed. 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. August 31, 2016 Date /s/ Benita Y. Pearson Benita Y. Pearson United States District Judge 1 Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d), three days must be added to the fourteen-day time period because Petitioner was served the Magistrate Judge’s Report by mail. See Thompson v. Chandler, 36 F. App’x. 783, 784 (6th Cir. 2002). 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.