McMullen v. Rogers
McMullen v. Rogers
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA RONALD LEE MCMULLEN, JR., ) Petitioner, Vv. Case No. CIV-25-127-J DAVID ROGERS, WARDEN, Respondent. ORDER Petitioner, a state prisoner appearing through counsel, filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody Pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 2254. [Doc. No. 1]. The matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Amanda Maxfield for initial proceedings consistent with
28 U.S.C. § 636. [Doc. No. 3]. On May 28, 2025, Judge Maxfield issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus be dismissed with prejudice as untimely. See [Doc. No. 6]. Petitioner was advised of his right to object to the Report and Recommendation by June 18, 2025. No objection has been filed. Petitioner has therefore waived any right to appellate review of the factual and legal issues in the Report and Recommendation. See Casanova v. Ulibarri,
595 F.3d 1120, 1123(10th Cir. 2010). Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 6] and DISMISSES Petitioner’s Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus with prejudice as untimely. Additionally, a certificate of appealability is DENIED, as the Court concludes Petitioner has not made “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.”
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c). IT IS SO ORDERED this 9" day of July, 2025.
TUDE mM. BERNARD M. JONES UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Reference
- Status
- Unknown