From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Johnston v. Bunting

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON
Apr 21, 2014
Case No. C-3:14-cv-074 (S.D. Ohio Apr. 21, 2014)

Opinion

Case No. C-3:14-cv-074

04-21-2014

ADAM C. JOHNSTON Petitioner, v. JASON BUNTING, Warden, Respondent.


Judge Thomas M. Rose

Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz

ENTRY AND ORDER OVERRULING JOHNSTON'S OBJECTIONS (Doc.

#6) TO THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND

RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. #5); OVERRULING JOHNSTON'S

SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTIONS (Doc. #9) TO THE MAGISTRATE

JUDGE'S SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

(Doc. #8); ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND

RECOMMENDATIONS AND SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT AND

RECOMMENDATIONS (Docs. #5 and #8) IN THEIR ENTIRETY;

DISMISSING JOHNSTON'S PETITION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS

CORPUS WITH PREJUDICE; DENYING A CERTIFICATE OF

APPEALABILITY; DENYING LEAVE TO APPEAL IN FORMA

PAUPERIS; AND TERMINATING THIS CASE

This matter comes before the Court pursuant to pro se Petitioner Adam C. Johnston's ("Johnston's") Objections (doc. #6) to Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz's Report and Recommendations (doc. #5) and Johnston's Supplemental Objections (doc. #9) to Magistrate Judge Merz's Supplemental Report and Recommendations (doc. #8). Magistrate Judge Merz performed an initial review of Johnston's §2254 Motion and found that it was barred by the statute of limitations. Magistrate Judge Merz's Report and Recommendations and Supplemental Report and Recommendations both recommend that the §2254 case filed by Johnston be dismissed with prejudice and that Johnston be denied a certificate of appealability and leave to appeal in forma pauperis.

The time has run and the Warden has not responded to either of Johnston's Objections. This matter is, therefore, ripe for decision.

As required by 28 U.S.C. §636(b) and Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 72(b), the District Judge has made a de novo review of the record in this case. Upon said review, the Court finds that Johnston's Objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendations and Johnston's Supplemental Objections to the Magistrate Judge's Supplemental Report and Recommendations are not well-taken, and they are hereby OVERRULED. The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendations and Supplemental Report and Recommendations are adopted in their entirety.

Johnston's §2254 Motion is denied with prejudice. Further, Johnston is denied a certificate of appealability and leave to appeal in forma pauperis. Finally, the captioned cause is hereby ordered terminated upon the docket records of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, Western Division, at Dayton.

DONE and ORDERED in Dayton, Ohio, this Twenty-First Day of April, 2014.

__________

THOMAS M. ROSE

UNITED STATED DISTRICT JUDGE
Copies furnished to: Counsel of Record
Adam C. Johnston at his last address of record


Summaries of

Johnston v. Bunting

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON
Apr 21, 2014
Case No. C-3:14-cv-074 (S.D. Ohio Apr. 21, 2014)
Case details for

Johnston v. Bunting

Case Details

Full title:ADAM C. JOHNSTON Petitioner, v. JASON BUNTING, Warden, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON

Date published: Apr 21, 2014

Citations

Case No. C-3:14-cv-074 (S.D. Ohio Apr. 21, 2014)