Howard v. Warden, London Correctional Institution, No. 3:2017cv00015 - Document 29 (S.D. Ohio 2017)

Court Description: DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE MERZ (DOC. 21 ), OVERRULING PETITIONER'S OBJECTIONS TO MAGISTRATE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS, (DOC. 18 , 24 ), DENYING PETITION FOR W RIT OF HABEAS CORPUS, (DOC. 1 ), AND TERMINATING THE INSTANT CASE : Because reasonable jurists would not disagree with this conclusion, Petitioner is hereby denied a certificate of appealability and the Court certifies to the Sixth Circuit that any appeal would be objectively frivolous and therefore Petitioner will not be permitted to proceed in forma pauperis. Signed by Judge Thomas M. Rose on 10/3/17. (ep)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
Download PDF
Howard v. Warden, London Correctional Institution Doc. 29 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON Everette E. Howard, Plaintiff, Case No. 3:17-cv-015 Judge Thomas M. Rose v. Warden, London Correctional Institution, Defendant. DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE MERZ (DOC. 21), OVERRULING PETITIONER=S OBJECTIONS TO MAGISTRATE=S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS, (DOC. 18, 24), DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS, (DOC. 1), AND TERMINATING THE INSTANT CASE. On March 25, 2016, Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz filed a Report and Recommendation, (Doc. 13), suggesting that the Court deny Petitioner Everette E. Howard’s Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus. (Doc. 1). Petitioner filed Objections to the Magistrate=s Report and Recommendations, (Doc. 18), prompting the Magistrate Judge to file a Supplemental Report and Recommendation. (Doc. 21). Petitioner then filed Objections to the Magistrate’s Supplemental Report and Recommendation. (Doc. 24). As required by 28 U.S.C. ' 636(b) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), the Court has made a de novo review of the record in this case, taking into consideration both of Petitioner’s objections. Upon said review, the Court finds that Plaintiff=s objections, (Docs. 22, 24), to the Magistrate Judge=s Supplemental Report and Recommendations, (Doc. 21), are not well taken and Dockets.Justia.com they are hereby OVERRULED. Wherefore, the Court ADOPTS IN FULL the Magistrate Judge=s Report and Recommendations. (Doc. 21). Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus, (Doc. 1), is hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Because reasonable jurists would not disagree with this conclusion, Petitioner is hereby denied a certificate of appealability and the Court certifies to the Sixth Circuit that any appeal would be objectively frivolous and therefore Petitioner will not be permitted to proceed in forma pauperis. DONE and ORDERED this Tuesday, October 3, 2017. s/Thomas M. Rose ________________________________ THOMAS M. ROSE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2