From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Prater v. Warden, Chillicothe Corr. Inst.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION
Mar 4, 2013
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:12cv0441 (WOB-SKB) (S.D. Ohio Mar. 4, 2013)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:12cv0441 (WOB-SKB)

03-04-2013

JAMES PRATER PETITIONER v. WARDEN, CHILLICOTHE CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION RESPONDENT


ORDER

This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (Doc. #13), and there being no objections filed thereto, and the Court being sufficiently advised,

IT IS ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation be, and it hereby is, adopted as the findings of fact and conclusions of law of this Court; that the respondent's motion to dismiss (Doc. #9) be, and it hereby is, granted; and that the petition for writ of habeas corpus, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 2254, is hereby dismissed, with prejudice, on the ground that it is time-barred under 28 U.S.C. Section 2244(d). A separate Judgment shall enter concurrently herewith.

Signed By:

William O. Bertelsman

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Prater v. Warden, Chillicothe Corr. Inst.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION
Mar 4, 2013
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:12cv0441 (WOB-SKB) (S.D. Ohio Mar. 4, 2013)
Case details for

Prater v. Warden, Chillicothe Corr. Inst.

Case Details

Full title:JAMES PRATER PETITIONER v. WARDEN, CHILLICOTHE CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION

Date published: Mar 4, 2013

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:12cv0441 (WOB-SKB) (S.D. Ohio Mar. 4, 2013)