From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Tibbetts v. Bradshaw

United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Western Division
Mar 29, 2006
Case No. 1:03-cv-114 (S.D. Ohio Mar. 29, 2006)

Opinion

Case No. 1:03-cv-114.

March 29, 2006


ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DENYING PETITION FOR HABEAS RELIEF


This matter is before the Court on the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendations and Supplemental Report and Recommendations on Petitioner Raymond Tibbetts' Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (doc. #5) (collectively "Reports") (docs. ##s 44, 48); Tibbetts' Objections to the Reports (docs. ##s 46, 49); and Respondent's Oppositions to Tibbetts' Objections (docs. ##s 47, 50.) Having reviewed the relevant pleadings, portions of the record, and law de novo, the Court hereby OVERRULES Tibbetts' remaining Objections (docs. ##46, 49) and ADOPTS the Magistrate's thorough and well-reasoned Reports (doc. #44, 46) in their entirety. Pursuant to the Reports and the Court's review, Tibbetts' Petition (doc. #5) is hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE on the merits.

Tibbetts' Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (doc. #5) included thirty claims, sixteen of which he later conceded or withdrew. (See, e.g., doc. #48 at 1 (referencing claims 1, 2, 6, 10, 11, 12, 17, 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, and 27.) The Magistrate Judge's original Report recommended denying Tibbetts' Petition as to each his remaining fourteen grounds. (See, e.g., id. (referencing claims 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 13, 14, 15, 16, 19, 29, and 30.) Tibbetts did not object to those portions of the original Report addressing his seventh, his thirteenth through sixteenth, nineteenth (partial), twenty-eighth, and thirtieth grounds, and concedes that this Court may therefore adopt the original Report as to those claims for lack of objection. (See, e.g., doc. #48 at 1; doc. #45 at 3.) The Magistrate Judge's Supplemental Report therefore addresses only Tibbetts' residual, or third, fourth, fifth, eighth, ninth, nineteenth (partial), and twenty-ninth grounds. (Doc. #48 at 1.) The Court's conclusions are based on its review of those portions of the Magistrate's Report and Supplemental Report and Tibbetts' Objections pertaining to those residual claims.

The Supplemental Report corrects and withdraws one erroneous statement in the original Report. (See doc. #48 at 2.) The Court adopts the original Report as corrected by the Supplement.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Tibbetts v. Bradshaw

United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Western Division
Mar 29, 2006
Case No. 1:03-cv-114 (S.D. Ohio Mar. 29, 2006)
Case details for

Tibbetts v. Bradshaw

Case Details

Full title:RAYMOND TIBBETTS, Petitioner, v. MARGARET BRADSHAW, Warden, Respondent

Court:United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Western Division

Date published: Mar 29, 2006

Citations

Case No. 1:03-cv-114 (S.D. Ohio Mar. 29, 2006)

Citing Cases

Tibbetts v. Warden, Chillicothe Corr. Inst.

This Court denied relief on the first petition and that denial was affirmed. Tibbetts v. Bradshaw, 2006 U.S.…

Tibbetts v. Warden, Chillicothe Corr. Inst.

The undersigned Magistrate Judge recommended dismissing that claim, Tibbetts did not object, and dismissal of…