Opinion
1:23-cv-205
06-16-2023
HOWARD E. MARTIN, III, Petitioner, v. WARDEN, CHILLICOTHE CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, Respondent.
Karen L. Litkovitz Magistrate Judge.
ORDER
SARAH D. MORRISON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
On May 18, 2023, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that the Court dismiss this case without prejudice to Petitioner Howard E. Martin, III's continued prosecution of his habeas corpus claims in Case No. 2:22-cv-4423. (R&R, ECF No. 3.) The Magistrate Judge explains that Mr. Martin's petition filed in this case is duplicative of the operative petition filed in Case No. 2:22-cv-4423. (Id.)
Mr. Martin objects to the Report and Recommendation, and although his Objection is untimely, he explains he only recently received information pertaining to this matter. (Obj., ECF No. 5.) Thus, the Court will consider the merits of Mr. Martin's Objection.
Mr. Martin cites various Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (41(b), which governs involuntary dismissal; 60(b), which governs relief from a judgment or order; 55(a), which deals with default entries). None of these Rules apply. This matter was not dismissed involuntarily for failure to prosecute or comply with the Rules or a Court order, nor has there been a motion for relief from a final judgment, order, or proceeding. See Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 41(b), 60(b). Rule 55(a) does not apply because under Rule 5 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, a respondent need not answer a petition unless a judge so orders.
Mr. Martin's remaining objections are difficult to decipher. He discusses the prison J-Pay system and allegedly wrongful takings of his intellectual property and clothing. (Obj. PageID 60.)
The Court has analyzed the Report and Recommendation. Mr. Martin's Objection is OVERRULED and the Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED and AFFIRMED. The Court DISMISSES this case without prejudice to Mr. Martin's continued prosecution of his habeas corpus claims in Case No. 2:22-cv-4423.
The Court also DENIES a certificate of appealability, as a reasonable jurist would not debate whether this matter is duplicative. The Court CERTIFIES that any appeal of this Court's dismissal would not be taken in good faith, and on that basis DENIES Mr. Martin leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal.
The Clerk is DIRECTED to terminate the case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.