From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McCoy v. Bradshaw

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION
May 21, 2012
CASE NO. 1:10CV00210 (N.D. Ohio May. 21, 2012)

Opinion

CASE NO. 1:10CV00210

05-21-2012

OMAR McCOY, Petitioner, v. MARGARET BRADSHAW, Warden Respondent.


PEARSON, J.

JUDGE BENITA Y. PEARSON


JUDGMENT ENTRY

For the reasons set forth in the Memorandum of Opinion and Order filed contemporaneously with this Judgment Entryhe Court hereby adopts the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 12-1), and the Court overrules Petitioner's objections to the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 15). For the reasons stated above, Petitioner's Petition for Habeas Corpus (ECF No. 1) is denied in its entirety.

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.

_______________

Benita Y. Pearson

United States District Judge


Summaries of

McCoy v. Bradshaw

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION
May 21, 2012
CASE NO. 1:10CV00210 (N.D. Ohio May. 21, 2012)
Case details for

McCoy v. Bradshaw

Case Details

Full title:OMAR McCOY, Petitioner, v. MARGARET BRADSHAW, Warden Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

Date published: May 21, 2012

Citations

CASE NO. 1:10CV00210 (N.D. Ohio May. 21, 2012)