Opinion
CIV 10-0713 RB/KBM CR 06-1795 RB
11-20-2012
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. STEVE N. JACKSON, Defendant-Movant.
ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION
The Magistrate Judge filed proposed findings that recommend Defendant's post-judgment motion be denied. The docket entry notes that objections were due on November 13, 2012. See Doc. 29. Defendant, who is incarcerated in a facility in Kentucky, filed his objections on November 14, 2012, and did not submit the necessary showings to take advantage of the prison mailbox rule. See, e.g., Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 270-71, 287 (1988); United States v. Ceballos-Martinez, 387 F.3d 1140, 1145 (10 Cir.), cert. denied, 543 U.S. 1005 (2004)l Blake v. Aramark Corp., ___ F. App'x ___, ___, No. 12-3053, 2012 WL 2899056, at *1 (10 Cir. Jul. 17, 2012); Mitchell v. Medina, ___ F. App'x ___, ___, No. 12-1217, 2012 WL 2628076 at *2 (10 Cir. Jul. 6, 2012), petition for cert. filed 9/19/12 (No. 12-6539). Nonetheless, the Court has considered his objections de novo, and finds them without merit. See, e.g., Garcia v. City of Albuquerque, 232 F.3d 760, 766-67 (10 Cir. 2000).
Wherefore,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's proposed findings (Doc. 29 in the civil action; Doc. 114 in the criminal action) are ADOPTED, and Defendant's motion for reconsideration (Doc. 28 in the civil action; Doc. 113 in the criminal action) is DENIED.
/s/_________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE