IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION AT CINCINNATI KENNETH GENTRY, : Case No. 1:18-cv-318 Petitioner, 2 Judge Matthew W. McFarland

WARDEN, CORRECTIONAL RECEPTION CENTER, : Respondent.

ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTIONS (Docs. 15, 18) AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (Doc. 13)

This action is before the Court on Petitioner Kenneth Gentry’s Objections, filed June 20 and June 28, 2019 (Docs. 15, 18), to Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz’s Report and Recommendation, filed June 5, 2019 (Doc. 13). Magistrate Judge Merz recommended that Gentry’s petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to

be dismissed with prejudice. (Doc. 13 at 11). Gentry objected, albeit in an untimely manner, to Magistrate Judge Merz’s Report & Recommendation, which is ripe for the Court's review. Gentry’s objections re-argue that his guilty plea was not knowing, intelligent, and voluntary and that State v. Kosto requires the vacating of his conviction, see 2018-Ohio- 1925, § 2, appeal not allowed,

, 4 2,

,

. Gentry also repeats his general assertions pertaining to the Fourth Amendment and Miranda v. Arizona,

(1966). None of these objections, however, confront the reasoning or conclusions of Magistrate Judge Merz’s Report and Recommendation.

Gentry fails to identify anything specific he believes may be incorrect in Magistrate Judge Merz’s findings. See Miller v. Currie,

(6th Cir. 1995). Such nonspecific objections are, in effect, restatements of prior arguments and amount to a failure to object. Bradley v. United States, No. 18-1444,

, at *3 (6th Cir. Sept. 17, 2018); Cole v. Yukins,

(6th Cir. 2001). As required by

(b) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), the Court has made a de novo review of the record in this case. Upon such review, the Court finds that Gentry’s Objections (Docs. 15, 18) are not well-taken and are accordingly OVERRULED. The Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendations (Doc. 13) in its entirety and Gentry’s petition for habeas corpus is DISMISSED with prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

a HE Y JUDGE MATTHEW W. McFARLAND