Summary
noting that the state court acted reasonably in accepting the prosecutor's explanation that the strike was based on the juror's "religious affiliation" and the fact that the stricken juror was unable "to look at [the prosecutor] when" he was "talking about . . . sitting impartial[ly]"
Summary of this case from Devorce v. PhilipsOpinion
9:03-CV-01423 (LEK/VEB).
July 12, 2007
DECISION AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court following a Report-Recommendation filed on May 24, 2007, by the Honorable Victor E. Bianchini, United States Magistrate Judge, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and L.R. 72.3(c) of the Northern District of New York. Report-Rec. (Dkt. No. 14).
Within ten days, excluding weekends and holidays, after a party has been served with a copy of a Magistrate Judge's Report-Recommendation, the party "may serve and file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations," FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b), in compliance with L.R. 72.1. No objections have been raised in the allotted time with respect to Judge Bianchini's Report-Recommendation. Furthermore, after examining the record, the Court has determined that the Report-Recommendation is not subject to attack for plain error or manifest injustice.
Accordingly, it is hereby
ORDERED, that the Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 14) is APPROVED and ADOPTED in its ENTIRETY; and it is further
ORDERED, that Petitioner's Petition (Dkt. No. 1) for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 is DENIED and DISMISSED; and it is further
ORDERED, that the Clerk serve a copy of this Order on all parties.
IT IS SO ORDERED.