Opinion
3:21-cv-245
03-22-2022
BRET MERRICK, Petitioner, v. WARDEN, Noble Correctional Institution, Respondent.
MICHAEL R. MERZ MAGISTRATE JUDGE
ENTRY AND ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTIONS (DOC. NO. 7, DOC. NO.
14, AND DOC. NO. 19); ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATIONS (DOC. NO. 4), SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATIONS (DOC. NO. 9), AND SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS (DOC. NO. 16); DISMISSING WITH
PREJUDICE THE PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS (DOC. NO.
3); AND, TERMINATING THE CASE
THOMAS M. ROSE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
This 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus action is before the Court on the Objections (Doc. No. 7, Doc. No. 14, and Doc. No. 19) filed by Petitioner Bret Merrick (“Petitioner”) to the Report and Recommendations (Doc. No. 4) (“Report”), Supplemental Report and Recommendations (Doc. No. 9) (“Supplemental Report”), and Second Supplemental Report and Recommendations (Doc. No. 16) (“Second Supplemental Report”). On September 7, 2021, Petitioner filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. No. 3) (the “Petition”). In the Report, Supplemental Report, and Second Supplemental Report, Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz- during the preliminary review stage pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing § 2254 Cases-analyzed the Petition (and any attached exhibits) and concluded that the Petitioner is not entitled to relief in the district court. (Doc. No. 4; Doc. No. 9; Doc. No. 16.) Accordingly, he recommended that this Court dismiss the Petition with prejudice. (Id.) Petitioner objected to the Report, the Supplemental Report, and the Second Supplemental Report. (Doc. No. 7; Doc. No. 14; Doc. No. 19.) The matter is ripe for the Court's review.
As required by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), the Court has made a de novo review of the record in this case. Upon said review, the Court finds that Petitioner's Objections (Doc. No. 7, Doc. No. 14, and Doc. No. 19) are not well-taken and they are hereby OVERRULED. The Court ACCEPTS the Report (Doc. No. 4), the Supplemental Report (Doc. No. 9), and the Second Supplemental Report (Doc. No. 16), ADOPTS them in their entirety, and rules as follows:
1 The Petition (Doc No. 3) is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE;
2. As reasonable jurists would not disagree with this conclusion, Petitioner is DENIED a certificate of appealability;
3. The Court CERTIFIES to the Sixth Circuit that any appeal would be objectively frivolous and therefore should not be permitted to proceed in forma pauperis;
4. The Clerk is directed to NOTIFY the petitioner; and
5. The Clerk is ordered to TERMINATE this case on the docket of this Court.
DONE and ORDERED.