Fields v. Davis

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION KURTIS FIELDS, ) CASE NO. 1:23-cv-00239 ) Petitioner, ) JUDGE BRIDGET MEEHAN BRENNAN ) v. ) ) WARDEN GEORGE A. FREDRICK, ) OPINION AND ORDER ) Respondent. ) Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of Magistrate Judge James E. Grimes, Jr. (Doc. 16) recommending that Kurtis Fields’ (“Petitioner”) pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 be denied. Once a magistrate judge issues a report, the relevant statute provides: Within fourteen days after being served with a copy, any party may serve and file written objections to such proposed findings and recommendations as provided by rules of court. A judge of the court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made. 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C) (flush language). The failure to timely file written objections to a R&R constitutes a waiver of a de novo review by the district court. Thomas v. Arn, 728 F.2d 813 (6th Cir. 1984), aff’d 474 U.S. 140 , 106 S. Ct. 466 , 88 L. Ed. 2d 435 (1985); see also United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 949-50 (6th Cir. 1981). The R&R was issued on February 19, 2025. The docket reflects the R&R was mailed to Petitioner at his address of record, that being the Marion Correctional Institution, the same day. As of the date of this Opinion and Order, the R&R has not been returned as undeliverable. The Ohio Department of Rehabilitation & Correction’s public website indicates Petitioner remains incarcerated at Marion Correctional Institution. The Court finds that the time for filing objections has passed with Petitioner stating no objection to the R&R. See Peoples v. Hoover, 377 F. App’x 461, 463 (6th Cir. 2010) (recognizing courts have enforced the rule requiring objection to a magistrate report regularly against pro se litigants). Having reviewed the R&R in its entirety, the Court hereby ACCEPTS and ADOPTS the R&R. Accordingly, Fields’ pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 is DENIED. The Court further certifies that there is no basis on which to issue a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253 ; Fed. R. App. P. 22(b). IT IS SO ORDERED. . Date: April 3, 2025 BRI J 2 MEEHAN As ENNAN UNITED STAT ISTRICT JUDGE