Raymer v. Samuels

Full title: Larry P. Raymer, Petitioner, v. Charles E. Samuels, Jr., Respondent

Court: United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Western Division

Date published: Aug 23, 2006

Case No. 1:05-cv-674 (S.D. Ohio Aug. 23, 2006)

Opinion

Case No. 1:05-cv-674.

August 23, 2006

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

SANDRA BECKWITH, District Judge

This matter is before the Court on the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation filed August 1, 2006 (Doc. 9).

Proper notice has been given to the parties under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), including notice that the parties would waive further appeal if they failed to file objections to the Report and Recommendation in a timely manner. See United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981). As of the date of this Order, no objections have been filed to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation.

Having reviewed this matter de novo pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, we find the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation to be correct.

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's Report is ADOPTED as follows:

1) Respondent's motion to dismiss is GRANTED and petitioner's petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 is DISMISSED with prejudice.

2) A certificate of appealability will not issue, because petitioner has failed to make a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right remediable in this federal habeas corpus proceeding. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) and Fed.R.App.P. 22(b).

3) This Court certifies that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) an appeal of this Order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore DENIES petitioner leave to appeal in forma pauperis. See Fed.R.App.P. 24(a); Kincade v. Sparkman, 117 F.3d 949, 952 (6^th Cir. 1997). Petitioner remains free to apply to proceed in forma pauperis in this Court of Appeals.

SO ORDERED.