From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hayden v. Haines

United States District Court, N.D. West Virginia
Sep 21, 2006
Civil Action No. 2:05cv20 (N.D.W. Va. Sep. 21, 2006)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 2:05cv20.

September 21, 2006


ORDER


It will be recalled that on May 25, 2006, Magistrate Judge Kaull filed his Report and Recommendation, wherein the Petitioner was directed, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), to file with the Clerk of Court any written objections within ten (10) days after being served with a copy of the Report and Recommendation. No objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation have been filed.

Upon examination of the report from the Magistrate Judge, it appears to the Court that the issues raised by the Petitioner in his Petition For Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, wherein Petitioner raises as grounds that his rights to equal protection of the law were violated by the Parole Board, and that his right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment was violated upon denial of parole, and raised by Respondent in his Motion to Dismiss, were thoroughly considered by Magistrate Judge Kaull in his Report and Recommendation. Moreover, the Court, upon an independent de novo consideration of all matters now before it, is of the opinion that the Report and Recommendation accurately reflects the law applicable to the facts and circumstances before the Court in this action. Therefore, it is ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Kaull's Report and Recommendation be, and the same hereby is, accepted in whole and that this civil action be disposed of in accordance with the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, it is

ORDERED that the Respondent's Motion to Dismiss shall be, and the same hereby is, GRANTED. It is further

ORDERED that James G. Hayden's Petition in this matter be, and the same hereby is, DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to the Petitioner's right to renew the same following the exhaustion of state remedies, and STRICKEN from the docket of this Court. It is further

ORDERED that the Clerk shall enter judgment for the Respondent. It is further

ORDERED that, if Petitioner should desire to appeal the decision of this Court, written notice of appeal must be received by the Clerk of this Court within thirty (30) days from the date of the entry of the Judgment Order, pursuant to Rule 4, Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. The $5.00 filing fee for the notice of appeal and the $455.00 docketing fee should also be submitted with the notice of appeal. In the alternative, at the time the notice of appeal is submitted, Petitioner may, in accordance with the provisions of Rule 24(a), Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, seek leave to proceed in forma pauperis from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.


Summaries of

Hayden v. Haines

United States District Court, N.D. West Virginia
Sep 21, 2006
Civil Action No. 2:05cv20 (N.D.W. Va. Sep. 21, 2006)
Case details for

Hayden v. Haines

Case Details

Full title:JAMES G. HAYDEN, Petitioner, v. WILLIAM HAINES, Respondent

Court:United States District Court, N.D. West Virginia

Date published: Sep 21, 2006

Citations

Civil Action No. 2:05cv20 (N.D.W. Va. Sep. 21, 2006)

Citing Cases

Wagner v. Zang

" 'Such testimony is admissible as tending to show the mental state of the grantor at the time of the…

Simon v. Middleton

Testimony was admissible to rebut any inferences, arising from the fact that testator did not revoke the will…