Morales v. Eppinger, No. 5:2017cv02629 - Document 11 (N.D. Ohio 2018)
Court Description: Memorandum of Opinion and Order. The Court adopts the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Related doc # 10 ). Respondent's Motion to Dismiss (Related doc # 8 ) is granted. Petitioner's Petition is dismissed as tim e-barred. The Court finds an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). Since Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of a denial of a constitutional right directly related to his conviction or custody, the Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b); Rule 11 of Rules Governing § 2254 Cases. Judge Christopher A. Boyko on 12/28/2018. (H,CM)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Morales v. Eppinger Doc. 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION MARCEL A. MORALES, Petitioner, vs. WARDEN LaSHANN EPPINGER, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CASE NO. 5:17-CV-2629 JUDGE CHRISTOPHER A. BOYKO MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER CHRISTOPHER A. BOYKO, J: This matter is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Ruiz’s Report and Recommendation (ECF DKT #10) to grant Respondent LaShann Eppinger’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF DKT #8) and dismiss Petitioner Marcel Morales’s Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (ECF DKT #1) as time-barred. Objections to the Report and Recommendation were due by December 11, 2018. Petitioner has not filed an objection to the Report and Recommendation. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b) provides that objections to a report and recommendation must be filed within fourteen days after service. FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(2). Petitioner has failed to timely file any such objections. Therefore, the Court must assume that Petitioner is satisfied with the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation. Any further review by this Court would be duplicative and an inefficient use of the Court’s limited resources. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 155 (1985); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 949-50 (6th Cir. 1981). Dockets.Justia.com Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, GRANTS Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss and DISMISSES Petitioner’s Petition as time-barred. The Court finds an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). Since Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of a denial of a constitutional right directly related to his conviction or custody, the Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); FED. R. APP. P. 22(b); Rule 11 of Rules Governing § 2254 Cases. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/ Christopher A. Boyko CHRISTOPHER A. BOYKO United States District Judge Dated: December 28, 2018 -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.
