From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Longstreth v. Franklin

United States District Court, W.D. Oklahoma
Jul 17, 2007
No. CIV-05-782-C (W.D. Okla. Jul. 17, 2007)

Opinion

No. CIV-05-782-C.

July 17, 2007


ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION


This action for habeas corpus relief brought by a prisoner, proceeding pro se, was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Bana Roberts, consistent with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). Judge Roberts entered a Report and Recommendation on May 15, 2007, to which Petitioner has timely objected.

The facts and law are accurately set out in Judge Roberts' Report and Recommendation and there is no purpose to be served in repeating them yet again. The arguments raised by Petitioner in his Objection are either without merit or were thoroughly addressed and resolved by Judge Roberts in the Report and Recommendation and the Court finds no error in Judge Roberts' reasoning.

Accordingly, the Court adopts, in its entirety, the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Dkt. No. 40), and for the reasons announced therein, denies this petition for habeas corpus relief. A judgment will enter accordingly.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Longstreth v. Franklin

United States District Court, W.D. Oklahoma
Jul 17, 2007
No. CIV-05-782-C (W.D. Okla. Jul. 17, 2007)
Case details for

Longstreth v. Franklin

Case Details

Full title:CHRISTOPHER E. LONGSTRETH, Petitioner, v. ERIC FRANKLIN, Warden, Respondent

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

Date published: Jul 17, 2007

Citations

No. CIV-05-782-C (W.D. Okla. Jul. 17, 2007)

Citing Cases

Strohmetz v. Rios

"The process which is due under the United States Constitution is that measured by the [D] [P]rocess…