Opinion
9:18-cv-864 (BKS/CFH)
09-30-2021
STEVEN JAMES, Petitioner, v. SUPERINTENDENT, Respondent.
Petitioner pro se: Steven James Cohoes, Letitia James Attorney General for the State Priscilla I. Stewar Assistant Attorney General
Appearances:
Petitioner pro se: Steven James Cohoes,
Letitia James Attorney General for the State Priscilla I. Stewar Assistant Attorney General
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
Brenda K. Sannes U.S. District Judge
On July 25, 2018, Petitioner pro se Steven James filed a petition seeking a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging his conviction, following a guilty plea, of attempted criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree. (Dkt. No. 1). On November 6, 2018, Respondent filed an answer, accompanied by the state court records. (Dkt. Nos. 7-8). Petitioner filed a traverse on November 29, 2018, and a supplemental traverse on April 17, 2019. (Dkt. Nos. 10, 13). This matter was assigned to United States Magistrate Judge Christian F. Hummel who, on September 13, 2021, issued a Report-Recommendation recommending that Petitioner's petition be denied and dismissed because the Fourth Amendment claims that he raised in the petition are foreclosed by Stone v. Powell, 428 U.S. 465 (1976). (Dkt. No. 16). Magistrate Judge Hummel advised the parties that under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), they had fourteen days within which to file written objections to the report, and that the failure to object to the report within fourteen days would preclude appellate review. (Id. at 7-8). No. objections to the Report-Recommendation have been filed.
As no objections to the Report-Recommendation have been filed, and the time for filing objections has expired, the Court reviews the Report-Recommendation for clear error. See Petersen v. Astrue, 2 F.Supp.3d 223, 228-29 (N.D.N.Y. 2012); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b) advisory committee's note to 1983 amendment. Having reviewed the Report-Recommendation for clear error and found none, the Court adopts the Report-Recommendation in its entirety.
For these reasons, it is
ORDERED that the Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 16) is ADOPTED in its entirety; and it is further
ORDERED that the Petition is DENIED and DISMISSED; and it is further
ORDERED that no certificate of appealability (“COA”) is issued because Petitioner has failed to make “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right” as required by 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). Any further request for a COA must be addressed to the Court of Appeals (Fed. R. App. P. 22(b)); and it is further
ORDERED that the Clerk serve a copy of this Order upon the parties in accordance with the Local Rules.
IT IS SO ORDERED.