Summary
denying habeas relief on ineffective counsel grounds because Fourth Amendment claim lacked merit
Summary of this case from Reed v. McQuigginOpinion
Case No. 05-73933.
May 29, 2007
OPINION AND ORDER
Petitioner Steven Joseph Kaufman ("Petitioner"), a former state prisoner now paroled, filed an application for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 on October 13, 2005. Petitioner challenges his October 13, 2000 conviction, pursuant to a guilty plea, of two counts of delivery of cocaine in the Macomb County Circuit Court. Respondent filed an answer to the petition on April 17, 2006. On May 31, 2006, this Court referred the matter to Magistrate Judge Paul J. Komives for the entry of a report and recommendation on the petition for writ of habeas corpus and for entry of any preliminary orders.
On March 26, 2007, Magistrate Judge Komives filed his Report and Recommendation (R R) recommending that this Court deny the petition for habeas corpus relief. At the conclusion of his R R, Magistrate Judge Komives advises the parties that they may object and seek review of the R R within ten days of service upon them. He further specifically advises the parties that, "[f]ailure to file specific objections constitutes a waiver of any further right of appeal." (R R at 20.) Neither party filed objections to the R R.
The Court has carefully reviewed the R R and concurs with the conclusions reached by Magistrate Judge Komives.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED, that Petitioner's application for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 is DENIED.