IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Norfolk Division

RAPHAEL CUFFEE, Petitioner, v. Case No. 2:24-cv-624 WARDEN J. ARTRIP, Respondent. ORDER Before the Court is a Petitioner Raphael Cuffee’s Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus filed pursuant to

; Respondent Warden J. Artrip’s Motion to Dismiss; and an unopposed Report and Recommendation (R&R), in which the Honorable Lawrence R. Leonard concluded that the Motion to Dismiss should be granted and the Petition should be denied and dismissed with prejudice. ECF Nos. 1 (Petition), 11 (Motion), 19 (R&R). Judge Leonard advised the parties of their rights to object to his findings and recommendations and explained that failure to timely object would result in a waiver of appeal from a judgment of this Court basedon such findings and recommendations. ECF No. 19 at 23–24 (citing Thomas v. Arn,

(1985); Carr v. Hutto,

(4th Cir. 1984); United States v. Schronce,

(4th Cir. 1984)). The

time to file an objection has expired, and neither party objected to the R&R. In the absence of a specific written objection, the Court may adopt a Magistrate Judge’s recommendations without conducting a de novo review, unless the recommendations are clearly erroneous or contrary to law. SeeFed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2); Orpiano v. Johnson,

(4th Cir. 1982) (citations omitted); Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co.,

(4th Cir. 2005).

The Court has reviewed Judge Leonard’s findings and recommendations and found no clear error. Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 19) is ADOPTED, Respondent Warden J. Artrip’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 11) is GRANTED, and Petitioner Raphael Cuffee’s Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus (ECF No. 1) is DENIED and DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Finding that the basis for dismissal of the Petition is not debatable, and alternatively finding that the petitioner has not made a “substantial showing of the

denial of a constitutional right,” a certificate of appealability is DENIED.

(c); see Rule 11(a) of the Rules Gov. § 2254 Cases in U.S. Dist. Cts.; Miller-El v. Cockrell,

, 335–38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel,

, 483–85 (2000). The petitioner is ADVISED that because the Court has denied a certificate of appealability, he may seek a certificate from the United States Court of Appeals for

the Fourth Circuit. Fed. R. App. P. 22(b); Rule 11(a) of the Rules Gov. § 2254 Cases in U.S. Dist. Cts. If the petitioner intends to seek a certificate of appealability from the Fourth Circuit, he must do so on or before September 5, 2025. The petitioner may seek such a certificate by filing a written notice of appeal with the Clerk of the United States District Court, United States Courthouse, 600 Granby Street, Norfolk, Virginia 23510. The Clerk is DIRECTED to send a copy of this Order to the petitioner. IT IS SO ORDERED. GY) /s/ Jamar K. Walker United States District Judge Norfolk, Virginia August 6, 2025