Jackson v. Morgan ( 2021 )

PEARSON, J. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION LEON D. JACKSON ) (#4692532), ) CASE NO. 1:19CV2404 ) Petitioner, ) ) JUDGE BENITA Y. PEARSON v. ) ) DONNIE MORGAN, Warden, ) ) MEMORANDUM OF OPINION Respondent. ) AND ORDER Petitioner Leon D. Jackson filed a pro se Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging the constitutional sufficiency of his conviction and sentence for complicity to commit felonious assault, complicity to commit aggravated burglary, and complicity to commit aggravated robbery. ECF No. 1. This case was referred for preparation of a report and recommendation to a magistrate judge of this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Local Rule 72.2(b)(2). On July 26, 2021, the magistrate judge issued a Report and Recommendation. ECF No. 10. He recommends that the Court deny the habeas petition. Jd. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2) provides that objections to a report and recommendation must be filed within 14 days after service. Any objections to the Report are, therefore, past due.’ Neither ' Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d), 3 days are added to the 14-day time period because Petitioner was served a copy of the Report by mail. See Thompson v. Chandler, 36 Fed.Appx. 783, 784 (6th Cir. 2002). Accordingly, Petitioner had until August 12, 2021, to file any objection. The Court has accounted for those 3 days, as well as additional time (continued...) (1:19CV2404) party has timely filed objections. Therefore, the Court reasons that the parties are satisfied with the magistrate judge’s recommendations. Any further review by this Court would be a duplicative and inefficient use of the Court’s limited resources. Thomas vy. 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). Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation of the magistrate judge is hereby adopted. Petitioner’s Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus will be 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. August 23, 2021 /s/ Benita Y. Pearson Date Benita Y. Pearson United States District Judge '(...continued) for any mailed objection to reach the Court, before issuing this order.