Opinion
2:21cv311
08-17-2022
MARKESE L. JONES, #1446668, Petitioner, v. HAROLD W. CLARKE, Director of the Virginia Department of Corrections Respondent.
FINAL ORDER
Raymond A. Jackson United States District Judge
Petitioner Markese L. Jones (“Jones”), a Virginia inmate, submitted a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. ECF No. 1. Jones alleges his federal rights were violated when he was convicted on November 20, 2012, following a bench trial in the Circuit Court of Mecklenburg County, of one count of attempted first-degree murder and one count of malicious wounding. Id. at 1-2, 43. Jones was sentenced to 60 years of incarceration with 30 years suspended. Id. at 45. Respondent filed a motion to dismiss the petition and Jones responded to the motion. ECF Nos. 15, 20.
This matter was referred to the United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and (C) and Local Civil Rule 72 of the Rules of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. On June 6, 2022, the Magistrate Judge prepared a report and recommendation, recommending that respondent's motion to dismiss, ECF No. 15, be granted, and the petition for a writ of habeas corpus, ECF No. 1, be denied and dismissed with prejudice as barred by the statute of limitations. ECF No. 21. Each party was advised of the right to file written objections to the findings and recommendations made at 5-6. On July 11, 2022, the Court received Jones' objec recommendations made by the Magistrate Judge. ECF No. 22.
The Court, having reviewed the record and examined the obj report and recommendation, and having made de novo findings a objected to, does hereby adopt and approve the findings and recon report and recommendation. The Court, therefore, ORDERS that res ECF No. 15, is GRANTED, and the petition for a writ of habeas cor and DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
Finding that the basis for dismissal of Jones' section 2254 p alternatively finding that Jones has not made a “substantial showing ol right,” a certificate of appealability is DENIED. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) Gov. § 2254 Cases in U.S. Dist. Cts.; Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473,483-85 (2000).
Jones is ADVISED that because a certificate of appealabilit may seek a certificate from the United States Court of Appeals for Ann. P. 22fbY Rule 1 Hal of the Rules Gov. 8 2254 Cases in U.S. D
The Clerk shall mail a copy of this Final Order to Jones and counsel of record for respondent.