From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Davis v. Coleman

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION
Mar 21, 2012
CASE NO. 5:11CV00996 (N.D. Ohio Mar. 21, 2012)

Opinion

CASE NO. 5:11CV00996

03-21-2012

DACHARY LAMONT DAVIS, Plaintiff, v. JOHN COLEMAN, Respondent.


PEARSON, J.

JUDGE BENITA Y. PEARSON


MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND

ORDER (Regarding ECF Nos. 6, 12)

Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Kathleen B. Burke recommending that Pro se Petitioner Dachary Lamont Davis's petition for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 be dismissed and Respondent John Coleman's motion to dismiss be granted. ECF Nos. 1, 6.

The matter was referred to Magistrate Judge Kathleen B. Burke for the preparation of a Report and Recommendation on the petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to Local Rule 72.2 and General Order 2011-18.

The Federal Magistrates Act requires a district court to conduct a de novo review only of those portions of a Report and Recommendation to which the parties have made an objection. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). Any further review by this Court would be a duplicative and inefficient use of the Court's limited resources. Thomas v. Arn, 728 F.2d 813 (6th Cir. 1984), aff'd, Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 145 (1985); Howard v. Sec'y of Health and Human Servs, 932 F.2d 505 (6th Cir. 1991); U.S. v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 949-50 (6th Cir. 1981). Parties must file objections to a Report and Recommendation within fourteen days of service. Id .; Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). Failure to object within this time waives a party's right to appeal the district court's judgment. Thomas, 474 U.S. at 145. Absent objection, a district court may adopt a magistrate judge's report without review. See Thomas, 474 U.S. at 149.

In the instant case, Petitioner Davis has not filed objections to the Report and Recommendation. The Court finds that the Report and Recommendation is supported by the record, and agrees with the recommendation to dismiss the instant petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d). Accordingly, the Court adopts Magistrate Judge Kathleen B. Burke's Report and Recommendation. ECF No. 12. Petitioner Davis's petition ( ECF No. 1) is dismissed, and Respondent Coleman's motion to dismiss is granted (ECF No. 6). The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an appeal from its decision could not be taken in good faith, and that there is no basis upon which to issue a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b).

The Clerk of this Court shall send a copy of the Order by regular mail to Dachary Lamont Davis at Allen Correctional Institution, 2338 North West Street, Lima, OH 45802-4501.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

______________________

Benita Y. Pearson

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Davis v. Coleman

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION
Mar 21, 2012
CASE NO. 5:11CV00996 (N.D. Ohio Mar. 21, 2012)
Case details for

Davis v. Coleman

Case Details

Full title:DACHARY LAMONT DAVIS, Plaintiff, v. JOHN COLEMAN, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

Date published: Mar 21, 2012

Citations

CASE NO. 5:11CV00996 (N.D. Ohio Mar. 21, 2012)