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.

Latham v. King

United States District Court, Fifth Circuit

November 15, 2013

LAMONT LATHAM Petitioner,
v.
RONALD KING Respondent.

ORDER ADOPTING PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION, GRANTING RESPONDENT'S MOTION TO DISMISS, AND DISMISSING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

HALIL SULEYMAN OZERDEN, District Judge.

BEFORE THE COURT is the Proposed Findings of Fact and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Robert H. Walker [8] entered on October 8, 2013. Also before the Court is the Respondent Ronald King's ("Respondent") Motion to Dismiss [7] the Petition for habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d). Respondent contends that Petitioner Lamont Latham's ("Latham") Petition was not timely filed and should be dismissed. The Court has thoroughly reviewed the findings in the Proposed Findings of Fact and Recommendation, the record, and the positions advanced in the Motion, and concludes that Latham's Petition was untimely filed, and Respondent's Motion should be granted.

To date, no objection to the Proposed Findings of Fact and Recommendation has been filed by Latham.[1] Where no party has objected to a magistrate judge's findings of fact and recommendation, a Court need not conduct a de novo review of it. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) ("[A] judge of the court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings and recommendations to which objection is made."). In such cases, the court need only review the proposed findings of fact and recommendation and determine whether it is either clearly erroneous or contrary to law. United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir. 1989).

Having conducted the required review, the Court finds that the Magistrate Judge's Proposed Findings of Fact and Recommendation thoroughly considered all issues and is neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law. The Court, being fully advised in the premises, finds that the Magistrate Judge properly recommended that Respondent's Motion to Dismiss should be granted and that the Petitioner's Petition be dismissed as time barred. The Proposed Findings of Fact and Recommendation should be adopted as the opinion of this Court.

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Proposed Findings of Fact and Recommendation [8] of Magistrate Judge Robert H. Walker entered on October 8, 2013, is adopted as the finding of this Court.

IT IS, FURTHER, ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Respondent's Motion to Dismiss [7] filed July 16, 2013, is GRANTED, and Petitioner's Petition for a writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED. A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with this Order as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58.

SO ORDERED AND ADJUDGED.


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.