Gardinor v. Miller

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA PATRICK E. GARDINOR, No. 4:21-CV-01794 Petitioner, (Chief Judge Brann) v. (Magistrate Judge Carlson) GEORGE MILLER, et al., Respondents.

ORDER AUGUST 15, 2025 Patrick E. Gardinor, a Pennsylvania state prisoner, filed this 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition seeking to vacate his convictions and sentence.1 Gardinor raises several different claims that focus on allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel and ineffective assistance of appellate and post-conviction relief counsel.2 On July 21, 2025, Magistrate Judge Martin C. Carlson issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that this Court deny the petition, as Gardinor’s claims are procedurally defaulted and/or without merit.3 No timely objections were filed to this Report and Recommendation.

1 Doc. 1.

2 Id. Where no objection is made to a report and recommendation, this Court will review the recommendation only for clear error.4 Regardless of whether timely objections are made, district courts may accept, reject, or modify—in whole or in part—the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.5 After reviewing the record, the Court finds no error—clear or otherwise—in Magistrate Judge Carlson’s conclusion that Gardinor’s claims are procedurally defaulted and without merit. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. Magistrate Judge Martin C. Carlson’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 20) is ADOPTED; 2. Gardinor’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition (Doc. 1) is DENIED; 3. The Court declines to issue certificate of appealability;6 and 4. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case.

BY THE COURT:

s/ Matthew W. Brann Matthew W. Brann Chief United States District Judge Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), advisory committee notes; see Henderson v. Carlson, 812 F.2d 874, 878 (3d Cir. 1987) (explaining that court should in some manner review recommendations regardless of whether objections were filed).

5 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Local Rule 72.31.

6 See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000) (setting forth legal standard).