Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Judges

MAURICE YOUNG, Petitioner, v. STATE OF MAINE, Respondent

Lance E. Walker UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

ORDER AFFIRMING RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

On February 1, 2019, the United States Magistrate Judge filed with the court, with a copy to Petitioner Maurice Young, his Recommended Decision on 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition (ECF No. 10). The Magistrate Judge explained that Petitioner has neither alleged any grounds for habeas relief nor articulated the relief he seeks in either his initial petition or his supplemental petition, and that dismissal of the petition was therefore in order.

The Petitioner filed his Objection to the Recommended Decision (ECF No. 11) on February 11, 2019. I have reviewed and considered the Recommended Decision, together with the entire record; I have made a de novo determination of all matters adjudicated by the Recommended Decision; and I concur with the recommendations of the United States Magistrate Judge for the reasons set forth in the Recommended Decision, and determine that no further proceeding is necessary.

It is therefore ORDERED that the Recommended Decision of the Magistrate Judge is hereby AFFIRMED and ADOPTED. The motion for habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 is DISMISSED.

It is further ORDERED that no certificate of appealability will issue from this Court because the Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right within the meaning of 28 U.S.C.A. § 2253(c)(2).

SO ORDERED.

Dated this 4th day of March, 2019.

/s/ Lance E. Walker


UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

Young v. Maine
(Mar 4, 2019)