United States v. Patrick

Full title: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. BRIAN LEE PATRICK…

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY SOUTHERN DIVISION LONDON

Date published: Jan 3, 2014

Criminal No. 09-31-GFVT (E.D. Ky. Jan. 3, 2014)

Opinion

Criminal No. 09-31-GFVT

01-03-2014

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. BRIAN LEE PATRICK, Defendant/Movant.

Gregory F. Van Tatenhove

ORDER

This matter is before the Court pending review of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Edward B. Atkins [R. 61] filed herein on August 30, 2012. Consistent with local practice, the Report and Recommendation addresses Patrick's motion to vacate, set aside or correct his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The Report and Recommendation concludes that the Petitioner is not entitled to the relief sought. It also advises the parties that any objections must be filed within fourteen (14) days of service or waive the right to further appeal. [Id. at 19.] As of this date, neither party has filed objections or sought an extension of time to do so.

Generally, this Court must make a de novo determination of those portions of a recommended disposition to which objections are made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(c). When no objections are made, however, this Court is not required to "review . . . a magistrate's factual or legal conclusions, under a de novo or any other standard . . . ." Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985). Parties who fail to object to a Magistrate's report and recommendation are also barred from appealing a district court's order adopting that report and recommendation. United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6^th Cir. 1981). Nevertheless, this Court has examined the record, and it agrees with the Magistrate Judge's Recommended Disposition. Furthermore, the Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability. The Court determines that reasonable jurists would not find the denial of Patrick's § 2255 motion debatable. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000).

Accordingly, and the Court being sufficiently advised, it is hereby ORDERED:

1. The Magistrate's Recommended Disposition [R. 61] as to Brian Patrick is ADOPTED as and for the Opinion of the Court;

2. Patrick's motion [R. 44] is DENIED;

3. A Certificate of Appealability is DENIED; and

4. JUDGMENT in favor of the Respondent will be entered contemporaneously herewith and this matter will be STRICKEN from the Court's active docket.

Signed By:

Gregory F. Van Tatenhove

United States District Judge