Opinion
CASE NO. 4:09-cv-00470-MP-GRJ
03-27-2013
ALLAN MICHAEL RUSH, Petitioner, v. WALTER A MCNEIL, KENNETH S TUCKER, Respondents.
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Doc. 26, Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, recommending that the petition at Doc. 1 be denied in its entirety. In Doc. 27, petitioner objected only to claim number 3. The Court has made a de novo determination of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which objection was made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). Upon consideration, the Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge that the state court was not unreasonable in finding that trial counsel's strategy of not subjecting petitioner to cross-examination but instead pointing to the lack of direct evidence of non-consent was reasonable under the circumstances. Thus, counsel was not ineffective in this or any other capacity. It is hereby
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:
The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, Doc. 24, is accepted and incorporated by reference. The the Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus, Doc. 1, is DENIED, and a certificate of appealability is DENIED.
________________
Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge