Opinion
3-04-CV-2725-P.
May 27, 2005
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Pursuant to the District Court's order of reference filed on May 25, 2005, came on to be considered Pugh's "Objection Motion to Review the Merits of the Pleadings of Petitioner" filed on May 24, 2005, and the magistrate judge finds and recommends as follows:
In substance Pugh's pleading (1) objects to the District Court's judgment previously filed on the basis that he claims error in the court's application of 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1) — the one-year limitation provision and the court's refusal to find that the limitation period was subject to equitable tolling in his case, and (2) the court's refusal to address the merits of the grounds asserted in his petition.
The District Court has previously made clear that the limitation period bars merits review of this § 2254 petition.See District Court order filed on May 25, 2005. Further, if Pugh claims that the District Court erred in applying § 2244(d)(1), his remedy, if any, is an appeal from the District Court's judgment filed on March 1, 2005.
RECOMMENDATION:
For the foregoing reasons it is recommended that the District Court deny Pugh's motion.