Opinion
Case No. 1:13-cv-928
02-17-2015
RYAN HOBBS, Petitioner, v. OHIO ADULT PAROLE AUTHORITY, Respondent.
Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz
DECISION AND ENTRY:
(1) ADOPTING THE SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (Doc. 21);
(2) DISMISSING WITH PREJUDICE PETITIONER'S PETITION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS (Doc. 3);
(3) DENYING A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY; AND
(4) DENYING AN APPLICATION TO PROCEED ON APPEAL IN FORMA PAUPERIS
This case is before the Court pursuant to the Order of General Reference in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio Western Division to United States Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz (previously Hon. Stephanie K. Bowman). Pursuant to such reference, the Magistrate Judge reviewed the pleadings filed with this Court and, on January 2, 2015, issued a Decision and Order (Doc. 16) in which he denied Petitioner's motion to submit further filings (Doc. 9) and Petitioner's motion for an evidentiary hearing (Doc. 13). Also pursuant to such reference, the Magistrate Judge reviewed the pleadings filed with this Court and, on January 6, 2015, submitted a Report and Recommendations (Doc. 17) regarding disposition of Petitioner's petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Petitioner filed Objections (Doc. 19), directed not only to the Report and Recommendations but also to the Decision and Order, and the Court recommitted the matter to the Magistrate Judge "with instructions to file a supplemental report analyzing the Objections and making recommendations based on that analysis" (Doc. 20). On January 20, 2015, the Magistrate Judge issued a Supplemental Report and Recommendations (Doc. 21). Petitioner again filed Objections (Doc. 22), to which Respondent responded (Doc. 23). Petitioner then filed a motion to stay proceedings and Objections to Respondent's response (Doc. 24). Pursuant to the general reference, the Magistrate Judge also reviewed this pleading and, on February 13, 2015, issued a Decision and Order (Doc. 25) denying Petitioner's motion to stay and striking his "second" set of objections.
Petitioner incorrectly interpreted the Court's January 16 Recommittal Order as a rejection of the Magistrate Judge's January 6 Report and Recommendations (see Doc. 22 at 1). Rather, the Court merely indicated that it had "preliminarily considered" Petitioner's Objections and believed they would be "more appropriately resolved after further analysis" by Magistrate Judge Merz (see Doc. 20). --------
As required by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), the Court has reviewed the comprehensive findings of the Magistrate Judge and considered de novo all of the filings in this matter. Upon consideration of the foregoing, the Court does determine that such Supplemental Report and Recommendations should be and is hereby adopted in its entirety. The Court does further determine that nothing contained within the January 2, 2015 Decision and Order or the February 13, 2015 Decision and Order is clearly erroneous or contrary to law.
Accordingly:
1. The Supplemental Report and Recommendations (Doc. 21) is ADOPTED;
2. Petitioner's petition for a writ of habeas corpus (Doc. 3) is time-barred and therefore DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE;
3. A certificate of appealability under 28 U.S.C. § 2253 is DENIED; and
4. Because any appeal would not be taken in good faith, an application to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. Section 1915(a)(3) is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED. Date: 2/17/15
/s/_________
Timothy S. Black
United States District Judge