Reed v. Sheldon, No. 5:2017cv02672 - Document 15 (N.D. Ohio 2019)
Court Description: Opinion and Order signed by Judge James S. Gwin on 9/20/2019. The Court adopts the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge without objection and denies the habeas petition for the reasons as set for in this order. The Court does not believe an appeal could be taken from this Order in good faith. (Related Doc. 1 and 14 ).(S,KM)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Reed v. Sheldon Doc. 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO -----------------------------------------------------------------PAUL REED, : : Petitioner, : : vs. : : ED SHELDON, Warden, : : Respondent. : ------------------------------------------------------------------ Case No. 5:17-cv-02672 OPINION & ORDER [Resolving Doc. 1] JAMES S. GWIN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE: In this case, Petitioner Paul Reed asks the Court to grant him a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 1 Reed’s petition arises from a 2015 case where an Ohio jury found him guilty of one count of murder and one count of complicity to commit murder. After the guilty verdicts, the state trial judge sentenced Reed to fifteen years to life imprisonment. With his habeas claim, Petitioner Reed claims violations of his due process rights on the basis of: (i) the insufficient evidence to support the charges, (ii) the trial court’s failure to give the jury selfdefense instructions, and (iii) the cumulative effect of the trial court’s abuses of discretion. 2 Accordingly, Petitioner Reed asks the Court for a writ of habeas corpus. 3 Magistrate Judge Parker issued a Report and Recommendation, that recommended the Court deny Reed’s request. 4 Neither party objected to this Report and Recommendation. If a party had objected to the Report and Recommendation, the Court would consider the objected-to findings and conclusions de novo. 5 However, because neither party has 1 Doc. 1. 2 Id. 3 Doc. 1. Respondent filed a return of writ. Doc. 9. Petitioner filed a traverse. Doc. 13. 4 Doc. 14. 5 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Dockets.Justia.com Case No. 5:17-cv-2672 Gwin, J. objected, they have forfeited the Court’s review. 6 Moreover, the Court agrees with Judge Parker’s thorough analysis and conclusions. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation and DENIES Petitioner’s request for a writ of habeas corpus. 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. There is no basis upon which to issue a certificate of appealability. 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. s/ Dated: September 20, 2019 James S. Gwin JAMES S. GWIN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 6 Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149–50 (1985) (holding that Congress did not intend to “require district court review of a magistrate judge’s factual or legal conclusions . . . when neither party objects to those findings.”). 7 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b). -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.
