From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Barnett

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY CENTRAL DIVISION at LEXINGTON
Aug 18, 2016
Criminal Action No. 5:09-CR-67-JMH-EBA-1 (E.D. Ky. Aug. 18, 2016)

Opinion

Criminal Action No. 5:09-CR-67-JMH-EBA-1 Civil Action No. 5:16-cv-224-JMH-EBA

08-18-2016

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. ROBERT HERALD BARNETT, Defendant.


MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER

** ** ** ** **

This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation entered by Magistrate Judge Edward B. Atkins [DE 188]. Said action was referred to the magistrate for the purpose of reviewing the merit of Defendant's Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct His Sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 [DE 176]. The Magistrate Judge recommends that this matter be transferred to the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit since it is a second-in-time, successive petition. Because Defendant has previously sought relief in this matter by means of a motion under § 2255 [DE 98], which relief was denied [DE 166] by this Court, the Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge that this matter must be transferred to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit pursuant to In re Sims, 111 F.3d 45, 47 (6th Cir. 1997) (per curiam), for review and certification as a second or successive motion. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 2244(a), 2255(h).

When the petitioner fails to file any objections to the Report and Recommendation, as in the case sub judice, "[i]t does not appear that Congress intended to require district court review of a magistrate's factual or legal conclusions, under a de novo or any other standard." Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985). Consequently and in the absence of any objections from Defendant Barnett, this Court adopts the reasoning set forth in the Report and Recommendation as to Barnett's Motion as its own.

The Court does not consider whether a certificate of appealability should issue since it reaches no conclusion as to the merits of Defendant's motion under § 2255.

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED:

(1) that the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation [DE 181] is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED.

(2) that the Clerk shall TRANSFER Defendant's Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct His Sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 [DE 176] to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit for further proceedings in keeping with In re Sims, 111 F.3d 45, 47 (6th Cir. 1997) (per curiam).

(3) that the Clerk shall STRIKE THIS MATTER FROM THE ACTIVE DOCKET.

This is the 18th day of August, 2016.

Signed By:

Joseph M . Hood

Senior U.S. District Judge


Summaries of

United States v. Barnett

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY CENTRAL DIVISION at LEXINGTON
Aug 18, 2016
Criminal Action No. 5:09-CR-67-JMH-EBA-1 (E.D. Ky. Aug. 18, 2016)
Case details for

United States v. Barnett

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. ROBERT HERALD BARNETT, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY CENTRAL DIVISION at LEXINGTON

Date published: Aug 18, 2016

Citations

Criminal Action No. 5:09-CR-67-JMH-EBA-1 (E.D. Ky. Aug. 18, 2016)

Citing Cases

Barnett v. Quintana

On August 18, 2016, the District Court agreed with the Magistrate Judge's recommendation that the motion be…