Carnail v. Bradshaw

Full title: E'YEN CARNAIL, Petitioner, v. MARGARET BRADSHAW, Respondent.

Court: United States District Court, Northern District of Ohio

Date published: Jun 29, 2021

1:12-cv-01042 (N.D. Ohio Jun. 29, 2021)

Opinion

1:12-cv-01042

06-29-2021

E'YEN CARNAIL, Petitioner, v. MARGARET BRADSHAW, Respondent.

JAMES S. GWIN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

OPINION & ORDER [RESOLVING DOC. 1]

JAMES S. GWIN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

Petitioner E'Yen Carnail seeks a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.^[1]

[1] Doc. 1.

Under Local Rule 72.2(b), this case was automatically referred to a Magistrate Judge for a Report and Recommendation.² On June 8, 2021, Magistrate Judge William H. Baughman, Jr. issued a Report and Recommendation, recommending that this Court dismiss Carnail's habeas petition.³ Any objections to the Report and Recommendation were due on June 22, 2021.⁴ Neither party filed objections.

2 Local Rule 72.2(b).

3 Doc. 54.

4 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Local Rule 72.3(b).

Because neither party objected, the Court could adopt the Report and Recommendation without review.⁵ Still, the Court reviewed the Report and Recommendation and agrees with Magistrate Judge Baughman that Carnail's habeas claims are procedurally defaulted under Ohio's res judicata doctrine.

5 See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149-53 (1985); U.S. v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 949-50 (6th Cir. 1981).

Consequently, the Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Baughman's Report and Recommendation and DISMISSES Carnail's petition. Further, the Court DENIES Carnail a certificate of appealability.⁶

6 28 U.S.C. § 2253.

IT IS SO ORDERED.