From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McCall v. Artus

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Sep 29, 2008
06 Civ. 3365 (SAS) (DF) (S.D.N.Y. Sep. 29, 2008)

Opinion

06 Civ. 3365 (SAS) (DF).

September 29, 2008

Petitioner (Pro Se): Henry McCall, Pine City, NY.

For Respondent: Gary S. Snitow, Assistant District Attorney, New York, NY.


ORDER


I have reviewed the Report and Recommendation ("R R") of United States Magistrate Judge Debra Freeman, dated August 19, 2008 (Document #9), which recommends that the habeas petition brought by McCall under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 be denied. Although petitioner was given the opportunity to file objections to the R R, he failed to do so. Based on my review, I hereby adopt the thorough and thoughtful R R in full.

In accordance with the R R, the instant habeas petition is dismissed with prejudice. Because petitioner's failure to file objections precludes appellate review, this Court will not issue a certificate of appealability. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 155 (1985); Frank v. Johnson, 968 F.2d 298, 300 (2d Cir. 1992) ("We have adopted the rule that failure to object timely to a report waives any further judicial review of the report."). The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case.

SO ORDERED:


Summaries of

McCall v. Artus

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Sep 29, 2008
06 Civ. 3365 (SAS) (DF) (S.D.N.Y. Sep. 29, 2008)
Case details for

McCall v. Artus

Case Details

Full title:HENRY McCALL, Petitioner, v. DALE ARTUS, Superintendent, Respondent

Court:United States District Court, S.D. New York

Date published: Sep 29, 2008

Citations

06 Civ. 3365 (SAS) (DF) (S.D.N.Y. Sep. 29, 2008)

Citing Cases

Andrews v. Leclaire

"Federal habeas relief 'does not lie for errors of state law.'" McCall v. Artus, No. 06 CV 3365 (SAS), 2008…

Rios v. Lempke

N.Y. Crim. Proc. Law § 40.10(a)(b). Where consolidation for trial of separately indicted charges are…