Summary
pointing out that the state-law standard of review is "more stringent" given that a "finding that a conviction is supported by the weight of the evidence [under Ohio law] must necessarily include a finding of sufficiency"
Summary of this case from Vunda v. WardenOpinion
Case Number: 1:14cv128
07-22-2015
Lorenzo P. Jackson, Petitioner(s), v. Warden Chillicothe Correctional Institution, Respondent(s).
ORDER
This matter is before the Court pursuant to the Order of General Reference in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio Western Division to United States Magistrate Judge J. Gregory Wehrman. Pursuant to such reference, the Magistrate Judge reviewed the pleadings and filed with this Court on May 12, 2015 a Report and Recommendation (Doc. 36). Subsequently, the petitioner filed objections to such Report and Recommendation (Doc. 39).
The Court has reviewed the comprehensive findings of the Magistrate Judge and considered de novo all of the filings in this matter. Upon consideration of the foregoing, the Court does determine that such Recommendation should be adopted.
Accordingly, the remaining claims for relief alleged in Grounds One through Four of petitioner's petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §2254 (Doc. 1) are DENIED with prejudice.
A certificate of appealability will not issue with respect to the remaining claims alleged in Grounds One through Four of the petition in the absence of a substantial showing that petitioner has stated a "viable claim of the denial of a constitutional right" or that the issues presented are "adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further." See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 475 (2000) (citing Barefoot v. Estelle, 463 U.S. 880, 893 & n (1983)); see also 28 U.S.C. § 2253 ( c ); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b).
With respect to any application by petitioner to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis, the Court will certify pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal of any Order adopting the Report and Recommendation will not be taken in "good faith," therefore, petitioner is DENIED leave to appeal in forma pauperis upon a showing of financial necessity. See Fed. R. App. P. 24(a); Kincade v. Sparkman, 117 F.3d 949, 952 (6th Cir. 1997).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Susan J. Dlott
Judge Susan J. Dlott
United States District Court