Opinion
CASE NO. 1:14CV0184
04-20-2015
MIGUEL A. MORAN, Petitioner, v. KIMBERLY CLIPPER, Warden, Respondent.
JUDGE BENITA Y. PEARSON MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER RE: DISMISSING PETITIONER'S APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
[Resolving ECF No. 10]
Pro Se Petitioner Miguel A. Moran filed a Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (ECF No. 1), alleging four grounds for relief which challenge the constitutional sufficiency of his conviction for rape, aggravated burglary, domestic violence, and aggravated trespass.
On June 6, 2014, the case was referred to Magistrate Judge Kathleen B. Burke for preparation of a report and recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Local Rule 72.2(b)(2).
After Respondent filed a Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 10), the Magistrate Judge submitted a Report & Recommendation (ECF No. 17) on March 20, 2015 recommending that the motion be granted and the petition be dismissed as barred by 28 U.S.C. § 2244's statute of limitations. (1:14CV0184)
Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2) provides that objections to a report and recommendation must be filed within 14 days after service. Objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report were, therefore, due on April 6, 2015. Petitioner has not filed any objections, evidencing satisfaction with the Magistrate Judge's recommendation. Any further review by the 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 , 474 U.S. 140 (1985); Howard v. Secretary of Health and Human Services , 932 F.2d 505 (6th Cir. 1991); United States v. Walters , 638 F.2d 947, 949-50 (6th Cir. 1981).
Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d), three days must be added to the fourteen-day time period because Petitioner was served the Magistrate Judge's Report by mail. See Thompson v. Chandler , 36 Fed. Appx. 783, 784 (6th Cir. 2002).
Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is hereby adopted. Respondent's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 10) is granted. Miguel A. Moran's Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus is dismissed.
The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an appeal from this 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).
IT IS SO ORDERED. April 20, 2015
Date
/s/ Benita Y. Pearson
Benita Y. Pearson
United States District Judge