Opinion
Civil Action No. 3:06-CV-1195-L.
August 31, 2007
ORDER
Before the court are the Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge, entered August 15, 2007. No objections to the magistrate judge's findings and conclusions were filed.
This is a habeas petition filed pursuant to 28 USC § 2254. Magistrate Judge Paul D. Stickney found that Petitioner's claims did not show a decision that was "contrary to" federal law or that the state court had unreasonably applied the law. Specifically, the magistrate judge determined that Petitioner's guilty plea in the state court was knowing and voluntary and that he failed to show that his counsel was ineffective. The magistrate judge also found that Petitioner's other claims should be denied because they do not raise jurisdictional challenges.
Having reviewed the pleadings, file and record in this case, and the findings and conclusions of the magistrate judge, the court determines that the findings and conclusions are correct. The magistrate judge's findings and conclusions are therefore accepted as those of the court. The court therefore denies the writ of habeas corpus and dismisses this action with prejudice.