United States v. Wright

Full title: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL WRIGHT, Defendant.

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY NORTHERN DIVISION COVINGTON

Date published: Dec 21, 2015

Criminal No. 13-8-ART-CJS (31) (E.D. Ky. Dec. 21, 2015)

Opinion

Criminal No. 13-8-ART-CJS (31)

12-21-2015

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL WRIGHT, Defendant.

Amul R. Thapar United States District Judge

ORDER

*** *** *** ***

In 2013, Michael Wright was convicted of conspiracy to distribute oxycodone and conspiracy to launder proceeds of unlawful activity, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 and 18 U.S.C. § 1956(h), respectively. See R. 974 (Judgment). He was sentenced to 160 months in prison, id. at 2, followed by 7 years of supervised release, id. at 3. In November 2014, Wright filed a motion to vacate his conviction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. R. 1251. Therein, he argues that his conviction should be vacated on the grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel. Id. He also argues that the district court made various errors during his sentencing. Id.

On November 25, 2015, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation, in which she recommended that the Court deny Wright's motion to vacate and issue no certificate of appealability. See R. 1478. That Report and Recommendation advised the parties that, "[w]ithin fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy of this Report and Recommendation, any party may serve and file specific written objections to any or all findings or recommendations[.]" Id. at 15-16. "Failure to make a timely objection," the Magistrate Judge further advised, "may, and normally will, result in waiver of further appeal to or review by the District Court and Court of Appeals." Id. at 16 (citing Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 155 (1986); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 950 (6th Cir. 1981)).

Given that the Magistrate Judge issued her Report and Recommendation on November 25, 2015, the parties had until December 9, 2015 to file any objections. Neither party filed an objection. And the time to do so has now passed. See Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 72(b). Thus, Wright has waived his right to file any objection to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation. See Walters, 638 F.2d at 950. Hence the Court will adopt the Report and Recommendation as its own opinion.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED as follows:

(1) The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, R. 1478, is ADOPTED.

(2) Wright's motion to vacate pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255, R. 1251, is DENIED.

(3) Wright is not entitled to a certificate of appealability.

This the 21st day of December, 2015.

Signed By:

Amul R . Thapar

United States District Judge