Opinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:12-CV-166 CRIMINAL ACTION NO. 3:12-CR-12 (BAILEY)
07-03-2014
DANIEL CHRISTOPHER JACKSON, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent.
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
On this day, the above-styled matter came before this Court for consideration of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge John S. Kaull. By Local Rule, this action was referred to Magistrate Judge Kaul! for submission of a report and a recommendation ("R&R"). Magistrate Judge Kauil filed his R&R on June 9, 2014 [Crim. Doc. 35 / Civ. Doc. 5]. in that filing, the magistrate judge recommended that this Court deny and dismiss this § 2255 petition with prejudice [Crim. Doc. 26 / Civ. Doc. 1].
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(c), this Court is required to make a de novo review of those portions of the magistrate judge's findings to which objection is made. However, the Court is not required to review, under a de novo or any other standard, the factual or legal conclusions of the magistrate judge as to those portions of the findings or recommendation to which no objections are addressed. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985). in addition, failure to file timely objections constitutes a waiver of de novo review and the right to appeal this Court's Order. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Snyder v. Ridenour, 889 F.2d 1363, 1366 (4th Cir. 1989); United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91, 94 (4th Cir. 1984). Here, objections to Magistrate Judge Kauli's R&R were due within fourteen (14) days of receipt, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b). The docket reflects that service was accepted on June 12, 2014 [Crim. Doc. 36]. To date, no objections have been filed. Accordingly, this Court will review the report and recommendation for clear error.
Upon careful review of the report and recommendation, it is the opinion of this Court that the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation [Crim. Doc. 35 / Civ. Doc. 5] should be,' and is, hereby ORDERED ADOPTED for the reasons more fully stated in the magistrate judge's report. As such, this Court hereby DENIES and DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE the petitioner's § 2255 petition [Crim. Docs. 21 & 26 / Civ. Doc. 1]. Additionally, petitioner's Motion to Request Appointment of Counsel [Crim. Doc. 33] is DENIED. Therefore, this matter is hereby ORDERED STRICKEN from the active docket of this Court. The Clerk is further DIRECTED to enter judgment in favor of the Respondent.
As a final matter, upon an independent review of the record, this Court hereby DENIES the petitioner a certificate of appealability, finding that he has failed to make "a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2).
It is so ORDERED.
The Clerk is directed to transmit copies of this Order to any counsel of record and to mail a copy to the pro se petitioner.
__________
John Preston Bailey
Chief United States District Judge