From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Perkins v. Miller

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
Jul 17, 2015
CASE NO. 3:14-cv-02572 (N.D. Ohio Jul. 17, 2015)

Opinion

CASE NO. 3:14-cv-02572

07-17-2015

CORY A. PERKINS, Petitioner, v. MICHELLE MILLER, Warden, Respondent.


OPINION & ORDER
[Resolving Docs. 1, 17]
:

Petitioner Cory Perkins seeks a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 to vacate his conviction on three counts of rape. On June 19, 2015, Perkins filed a motion to stay his petition or to dismiss it without prejudice. Perkins concedes that he has not yet exhausted state remedies with regard to the claims in his petition. On June 26, 2015, Magistrate Judge Limbert issued a Report and Recommendation ("R&R"), recommending that the Court deny Perkins's motion to stay, but grant Perkins's motion to dismiss his petition without prejudice. Magistrate Judge Limbert further recommended that Perkins's motion for an evidentiary hearing be denied as moot.

Doc. 1.

Doc. 15.

Id.

Doc. 17.

Doc. 5.

Doc. 17 at 3.

The Federal Magistrates Act requires a district court to conduct a de novo review only of those portions of a R&R to which a party has made an objection. Parties must file any objections to a R&R within fourteen days of service. Failure to object within that time waives a party's right to have the Court review the R&R.

LR 72.3(b); see Thomas v . Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 145 (1985); United States v . Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 949-50 (6th Cir. 1981).

Absent objection, a district court may adopt the R&R without review. Neither party has objected to the R&R. Moreover, having conducted its own review of the record and the parties' briefing in this case, the Court agrees with the conclusions of Magistrate Judge Limbert.

See Thomas , 474 U.S. at 149. --------

Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS in whole Magistrate Judge Limbert's R&R and incorporates it fully herein by reference. The Court DENIES Perkins's request to stay his petition, but GRANTS Perkins's request to dismiss his petition without prejudice. Further, the Court DENIES Perkins's motion for an evidentiary hearing as moot.

IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: July 17, 2015

s/ James S. Gwin

JAMES S. GWIN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Perkins v. Miller

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
Jul 17, 2015
CASE NO. 3:14-cv-02572 (N.D. Ohio Jul. 17, 2015)
Case details for

Perkins v. Miller

Case Details

Full title:CORY A. PERKINS, Petitioner, v. MICHELLE MILLER, Warden, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

Date published: Jul 17, 2015

Citations

CASE NO. 3:14-cv-02572 (N.D. Ohio Jul. 17, 2015)