Opinion
CASE NO. 2:08-cv-01079.
June 10, 2010
OPINION AND ORDER
On January 25, 2010, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that the instant petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 be dismissed. Petitioner has filed objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation. For the reasons that follow, petitioner's objections are OVERRULED. The Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED and AFFIRMED. This action is hereby DISMISSED. Petitioner's motion for judgment, Doc. No. 11, is DENIED, as moot.
Petitioner objects to the Magistrate Judge's recommendation of dismissal of his claims. He again contends that his guilty plea was unlawfully induced by intimidation from counsel, and argues that his sentence violated Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296 (2004), and due process. However, as discussed by the Magistrate Judge, petitioner's sentence, which was imposed pursuant to the terms of petitioner's negotiated guilty plea and the joint recommendation of the parties, did not violate Blakely. Further, to the extent that he alleges that his guilty plea was coerced or the product of intimidation and the ineffective assistance of counsel, such claim relies on evidence not readily apparent from the face of the record, and would be properly raised in a petition for post conviction relief pursuant to O.R.C. § 2953.21; however, the time period for filing such action in the state courts has long since expired, and the record fails to reflect that petitioner can meet the requirements for consideration of his claims in an untimely post conviction action. See O.R.C. § 2953.23.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), this Court has conducted a de novo review. For the foregoing reasons and for the reasons detailed in the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, petitioner's objections are OVERRULED. The Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED and AFFIRMED. This action is hereby DISMISSED. Petitioner's motion for judgment, Doc. No. 11, is DENIED, as moot.
IT IS SO ORDERED.