From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rodriguez v. Wilson

United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Eastern Division
Jun 21, 2007
CASE NO. 1: 04 CV 667 (N.D. Ohio Jun. 21, 2007)

Opinion

CASE NO. 1: 04 CV 667.

June 21, 2007


MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER


This matter comes before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge James S. Gallas. The Report and Recommendation (ECF # 19) is ADOPTED by this Court, and Petitioner's motion to vacate, set aside, or correct the sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (ECF # 1) is DENIED.

Petitioner filed this motion to vacate, set aside, or correct the sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 on April 8, 2004. Pursuant to Local Rule 72.2, this matter was referred to Magistrate Judge Gallas for the preparation of a report and recommendation. On May 24, 2007, Magistrate Judge Gallas recommended that the Court dismiss the motion due to untimeliness. Petitioner has not filed any objections to the Report and Recommendation.

The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation de novo. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). The Court finds the Report and Recommendation to be well-supported and correct. Therefore, the Report and Recommendation (ECF # 19) is ADOPTED in its entirety. Petitioner's motion to vacate, set aside, or correct the sentence is DENIED.

Further, the Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith, and there is no basis upon which to issue a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c); Fed.R.App.P. 22(b).

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Rodriguez v. Wilson

United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Eastern Division
Jun 21, 2007
CASE NO. 1: 04 CV 667 (N.D. Ohio Jun. 21, 2007)
Case details for

Rodriguez v. Wilson

Case Details

Full title:LUIS LOPEZ RODRIGUEZ, Petitioner, v. JULIUS WILSON, Warden, Respondent

Court:United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Eastern Division

Date published: Jun 21, 2007

Citations

CASE NO. 1: 04 CV 667 (N.D. Ohio Jun. 21, 2007)