From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Campbell v. Province

United States District Court, E.D. Oklahoma
Jan 29, 2008
Case No. CIV-06-382-RAW (E.D. Okla. Jan. 29, 2008)

Summary

finding procedural bar based on OCCA's Rule 10.3 to be independent and adequate

Summary of this case from Hackett v. Farris

Opinion

Case No. CIV-06-382-RAW.

January 29, 2008


ORDER


On January 10, 2008, Magistrate Judge Kimberly E. West filed a Report and Recommendation, recommending that this action (commenced by Petitioner's filing of a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241) be in all respects dismissed. Petitioner filed an Objection on January 18, 2008. The Court has conducted the de novo review required by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) of "those portions of the report or specified findings or recommendations to which objection is made." Upon such review, the Court finds that the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation is well-supported by the evidence and the prevailing legal authority. As a result, Petitioner's objections to the Report and Recommendation are overruled.

Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge West is hereby AFFIRMED and ADOPTED as this Court's Findings and Order. Petitioner's petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 is hereby DISMISSED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Campbell v. Province

United States District Court, E.D. Oklahoma
Jan 29, 2008
Case No. CIV-06-382-RAW (E.D. Okla. Jan. 29, 2008)

finding procedural bar based on OCCA's Rule 10.3 to be independent and adequate

Summary of this case from Hackett v. Farris
Case details for

Campbell v. Province

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL CAMPBELL, Petitioner, v. GREG PROVINCE, Warden, Respondent

Court:United States District Court, E.D. Oklahoma

Date published: Jan 29, 2008

Citations

Case No. CIV-06-382-RAW (E.D. Okla. Jan. 29, 2008)

Citing Cases

Wiggins v. Fudge

Plaintiff does not argue his parole eligibility date has been improperly determined and "it is clear that the…

Metoyer v. Fudge

Plaintiff does not argue his parole eligibility date has been improperly determined and "it is clear that the…