UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA EASTERN DIVISION

JONATHON VIRGIL DAVIS, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) Case No. 1:19-cv-01086-KOB-SGC ) PATRICE RICHIE, et al., ) ) Respondents. )

MEMORANDUM OPINION The magistrate judge entered a report on June 22, 2021, recommending the court deny Jonathan Virgil Davis’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to

. (Doc. 8). The magistrate judge further recommended denial of a certificate of appealability. (Id. at 33). On July 13, 2021, counsel for Davis filed objections. (Doc. 11). Davis has numbered his objections 1 through 14. Except for one, each objection begins with “The Magistrate Judge erred . . .” and consists of a single, conclusory sentence. (Doc. 11 at 1-3). Section IV of the report and recommendation plainly states: Objections should specifically identify all findings of fact and recommendations to which objection is made and the specific basis for objecting. Objections also should specifically identify all claims contained in the petition that the report and recommendation fails to address. Objections should not contain new allegations, present additional evidence, or repeat legal arguments.

(Doc. 8 at 34) (emphasis added). Davis has failed to provide any basis for 13 of his objections. Accordingly, the court overrules Davis’s conclusory objections. In objection number 9, Davis states: “The Magistrate Judge’s reliance on Griffin v. California,

(1965) is misplaced, in that the Court in Griffin actually found that the prosecutor did impermissibly comment on the defendant’s right not to testify.” (Doc. 11 at 3). The report and recommendation quoted the general rule as stated in Griffin: “the Fifth Amendment . . . forbids either

comment by the prosecution on the accused’s silence or instructions by the court that such silence is evidence of such guilt.” (See Doc. 8 at 29) (quoting Griffin,

). The report went on to explain the rule is not absolute, citing the Eleventh

Circuit’s standard for evaluating a Griffin claim. (Doc. 8 at 29–31). Finally, the report correctly analyzed Davis’s Fifth Amendment claim under the applicable standard. (Doc. 8 at 31–32). The court finds no error in the report and recommendation concerning this issue.

Therefore, after consideration of the entire record in this case, Davis’s objections are OVERRULED. The court ADOPTS the magistrate judge’s report, and ACCEPTS her recommendations. A certificate of appealability will be denied.

The court will enter a separate Final Judgment. DONE and ORDERED this 20th day of August, 2021.

____________________________________ KARON OWEN BOWDRE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE