Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Noland v. Crews

United States District Court, Sixth Circuit

December 4, 2013

WALTER NOLAND, Petitioner,
v.
COOKIE CREWS, WARDEN, Respondent.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

CHARLES R. SIMPSON, III, Senior Judge.

This matter is before the court on a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 filed pro se by Petitioner Walter Noland ("Petitioner"). In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A), the matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge James D. Moyer for proposed findings of fact and recommendations. In his Report and Recommendation, Judge Moyer recommends that the petition be denied on the ground that Petitioner has failed to establish a violation of his Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), Petitioner has raised several objections to the Report, with respect to which this Court must now make a de novo determination.

However, Petitioner's objections are based entirely on irrelevant factual and legal arguments, misinterpretations of the Report, and reiterations of arguments set forth in his petition.[1] Thus, because "[p]oorly drafted objections, general objections, or objections that require a judge's interpretation should be afforded no effect and are insufficient to preserve the right of appeal, " United States v. Mullikin, No. 5:05-162-JMH, 2013 WL 3107560 (E.D. Ky. June 18, 2013) (citing Howard v. Sec'y of Health and Human Servs., 932 F.2d 505, 509 (6th Cir. 1992)), the Court will not address the substance of Petitioner's objections.

Having determined that Petitioner's objections do not warrant consideration, the Court will adopt the Report and Recommendation in its entirety. Moreover, because we agree that no reasonable jurist could dispute the conclusions set forth therein, the Court will deny a certificate of appealability.

For the reasons set forth herein and the court being otherwise sufficiently advised, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (DN 22) is ACCEPTED AND ADOPTED IN ITS ENTIRETY and the objections of Petitioner Walter Noland (DN 24) are OVERRULED. Further, for the reasons stated, a certificate of appealability will be DENIED as to each claim asserted in the petition.

A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with this memorandum opinion and order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.