From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Coleman v. Mississippi

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI SOUTHERN DIVISION
Mar 8, 2012
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:11cv223HSO-JMR (S.D. Miss. Mar. 8, 2012)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:11cv223HSO-JMR

03-08-2012

NATHANIEL L. COLEMAN PETITIONER v. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI, ET AL. RESPONDENTS


ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION.

AND GRANTING RESPONDENTS' MOTION TO DISMISS,

AND DISMISSING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation of Chief United States Magistrate Judge John M. Roper [13-1] entered in this cause on December 12, 2011. Also before the Court is the Respondents' Motion to Dismiss [7-1] Nathaniel Coleman's habeas corpus Petition based on the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d). Respondents contend that Coleman's habeas Petition was not timely filed and should be dismissed. The Court has thoroughly reviewed the findings in the Report and Recommendation, the record, and the positions advanced in the Motion, and concludes that Coleman's Petition was untimely filed. Respondents' Motion should therefore be granted.

To date, no objection to the Report and Recommendation has been filed by Petitioner. Where no party has objected to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, the Court need not conduct a de novo review of it. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) ("a judge of the court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings and recommendations to which objection is made."). In such cases, the Court need only review the Report and Recommendation and determine whether it is either clearly erroneous or contrary to law. United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir. 1989).

The record reflects that on January 3, 2012, Petitioner signed for receipt of the Report and Recommendation [14-1].

Having conducted the required review, the Court finds that the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation thoroughly considered all issues, is neither clearly erroneous, nor contrary to law. The Court, being fully advised in the premises, finds that the Magistrate Judge properly recommended that Defendant's Motion to Dismiss should be granted. Said Report and Recommendation should be adopted as the opinion of this Court.

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that, the Report and Recommendation [13-1] of Chief Magistrate Judge John M. Roper entered on December 12, 2011, is adopted as the finding of this Court.

IT IS, FURTHER, ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that, Respondents' Motion to Dismiss [8-1] filed JULY 11, 2011, is GRANTED. A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with this order as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58.

SO ORDERED AND ADJUDGED, this the 8th day of March, 2012.

______________________________

HALIL SULEYMAN OZERDEN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Coleman v. Mississippi

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI SOUTHERN DIVISION
Mar 8, 2012
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:11cv223HSO-JMR (S.D. Miss. Mar. 8, 2012)
Case details for

Coleman v. Mississippi

Case Details

Full title:NATHANIEL L. COLEMAN PETITIONER v. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI, ET AL. RESPONDENTS

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI SOUTHERN DIVISION

Date published: Mar 8, 2012

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:11cv223HSO-JMR (S.D. Miss. Mar. 8, 2012)