Camara v. Coleman, No. 3:2016cv00756 - Document 11 (N.D. Ohio 2017)

Court Description: Memorandum of Opinion and Order For the reasons set forth herein, the Court hereby adopts the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Greenberg (ECF No. 10 ). The Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus (ECF No. 1 ) is dismissed. The Cou rt 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 12/15/2017. (JLG)
Download PDF
Camara v. Coleman Doc. 11 PEARSON, J. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION ROBERT CAMARA, Petitioner, v. WARDEN HAVILAND, originally named as John Coleman Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CASE NO. 3:16CV756 JUDGE BENITA Y. PEARSON MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER [Regarding ECF No. 10] Pro se Petitioner Robert Camara filed a Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. ECF No. 1. Respondent Warden James Haviland filed a Return of Writ. ECF No. 8. The case was referred to Magistrate Judge Nancy A. Vecchiarelli for preparation of a report and recommendation pursuant to Local Rule 72.2(b)(2). On August 19, 2016, the referral to Magistrate Judge Vecchiarelli was withdrawn due to her retirement, and the case was referred to Magistrate Judge Jonathan D. Greenberg. On October 6, 2017, Magistrate Judge Greenberg submitted a report and recommendation, recommending that the petition be dismissed. ECF No. 10. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2) provides that objections to a report and recommendation must be filed within 14 days after service. Objections to the magistrate judge’s report were, therefore, due on October 23, 2017.1 Petitioner has not filed any objections to Magistrate 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). Dockets.Justia.com (3:16CV756) Greenberg’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. Sec’y of Health and Human Servs., 932 F.2d 505 (6th Cir. 1991); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 949 50 (6th Cir. 1981). Accordingly, the Court hereby adopts the Report and Recommendation. The Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus (ECF No. 1) 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. December 15, 2017 Date /s/ Benita Y. Pearson Benita Y. Pearson United States District Judge 2
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.