Person v. Gray, No. 5:2018cv01374 - Document 12 (N.D. Ohio 2021)

Court Description: Memorandum Opinion and Order: I adopt the Report and Recommendation, (Doc. No. 11), in its entirety as the Order of the Court and dismiss pro se Petitioner Larry D. Person's petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 as unexhausted. Further, I certify there is no basis on which to issue a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253; Fed. R. App. P. 22(b). re 11 . Judge Jeffrey J. Helmick on 3/8/2021. (S,AL)

Download PDF
Person v. Gray Doc. 12 Case: 5:18-cv-01374-JJH Doc #: 12 Filed: 03/08/21 1 of 2. PageID #: 201 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION Larry D. Person, Case No. 5:18-cv-1374 Petitioner, v. ORDER Warden David Gray, Respondent. Before me is the April 3, 2020 Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Jonathan D. Greenberg, (Doc. No. 11), recommending I deny pro se Petitioner Larry Person’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 because Person failed to exhaust his claims before the Ohio courts or, in the alternative, that his claims are waived and are not cognizable in habeas proceedings. Under the relevant statute, “[w]ithin fourteen days after being served with a copy, any party may serve and file written objections to such proposed findings and recommendations as provided by rules of court.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 949-50 (6th Cir. 1981). The fourteen-day period has elapsed and no objections have been filed. The failure to file written objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation constitutes a waiver of a determination by the district court of an issue covered in the report. Thomas v. Arn, 728 F.2d 813 (6th Cir. 1984), aff’d, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); see also Walters, 638 F.2d at 950; Smith v. Detroit Fed’n of Teachers, Local 231, 829 F.2d 1370, 1373 (6th Cir. 1987) (“[O]nly those Dockets.Justia.com Case: 5:18-cv-01374-JJH Doc #: 12 Filed: 03/08/21 2 of 2. PageID #: 202 specific objections to the magistrate’s report made to the district court will be preserved for appellate review”). Following my review of the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, I adopt the Report and Recommendation, (Doc. No. 11), in its entirety as the Order of the Court and dismiss Person’s petition as unexhausted. Further, I certify there is no basis on which to issue a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253; Fed. R. App. P. 22(b). So Ordered. s/ Jeffrey J. Helmick 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.