Summary
rejecting § 2254 petition, and holding that "mere fact that the trial court, following conviction, imposed a high sentence does not, in and of itself, establish `actual vindictiveness'"
Summary of this case from Mateo v. Fishkill Correctional FacilityOpinion
9:02-CV-0074 (LEK/VEB).
June 6, 2007
DECISION AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court following a Report-Recommendation filed on April 06, 2007, by the Honorable Victor E. Bianchini, United States Magistrate Judge, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and L.R. 72.3(c) of the Northern District of New York. Report-Rec. (Dkt. No. 39).
Within ten days, excluding weekends and holidays, after a party has been served with a copy of a Magistrate Judge's Report-Recommendation, the party "may serve and file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations," FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b), in compliance with L.R. 72.1. No objections have been raised in the allotted time with respect to Judge Bianchini's Report-Recommendation. Furthermore, after examining the record, the Court has determined that the Report-Recommendation is not subject to attack for plain error or manifest injustice.
Accordingly, it is hereby
ORDERED, that the Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 39) is APPROVED and ADOPTED in its ENTIRETY; and it is further
ORDERED, that Petitioner's amended Petition (Dkt. No. 28) for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 is DENIED and DISMISSED; and it is further
ORDERED, that a certificate of appealability is not issued; and it is further
ORDERED, that the Clerk serve a copy of this Order on all parties.
IT IS SO ORDERED.