From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cunningham v. Merrill

United States District Court, D. Maine
Apr 24, 2003
Civil No. 02-158-B-S (D. Me. Apr. 24, 2003)

Opinion

Civil No. 02-158-B-S.

April 24, 2003

FRANK CUNNINGHAM, PRO SE, LIMERICK, ME, Attorney for Plaintiff.

DAVID M. SPENCER, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, AUGUSTA, ME, Attorney for Respondent.


ORDER AFFIRMING THE RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE


The United States Magistrate Judge filed with the Court on April 1, 2003 her Recommended Decision on 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Motion. Petitioner filed his objection to the Recommended Decision on April 14, 2003 and Respondent filed his response by letter to that objection on April 21, 2003. I have reviewed and considered the Magistrate Judge's Recommended Decision, together with the entire record; I have made a de novo determination of all matters adjudicated by the Magistrate Judge's Recommended Decision; and I concur with the recommendations of the United States Magistrate Judge for the reasons set forth in her Recommended Decision, and determine that no further proceeding is necessary.

1. It is therefore ORDERED that the Recommended Decision of the Magistrate Judge is hereby AFFIRMED.

2. The Court DENIES the 28 U.S.C. Petition.


Summaries of

Cunningham v. Merrill

United States District Court, D. Maine
Apr 24, 2003
Civil No. 02-158-B-S (D. Me. Apr. 24, 2003)
Case details for

Cunningham v. Merrill

Case Details

Full title:FRANK CUNNINGHAM, Petitioner, vs. JEFFREY MERRILL, WARDEN Respondent

Court:United States District Court, D. Maine

Date published: Apr 24, 2003

Citations

Civil No. 02-158-B-S (D. Me. Apr. 24, 2003)