Summary
The United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia adopted the magistrate judge’s recommendation and denied Jason Michael Terrell’s motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The court dismissed the civil action, directed the Clerk to remove it from the active docket, and denied a certificate of appealability. No party filed objections to the findings and recommendation.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the district court should adopt the magistrate judge's findings and recommendation when neither party filed timely objections.
- Whether Terrell's motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 should be denied and the action dismissed.
- Whether to issue a certificate of appealability under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c).
Holdings
- Because neither party filed timely objections, the parties waived their right to de novo review, and the district court adopted the magistrate judge's findings and recommendation.
- Terrell's motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 was denied, and the action was dismissed.
- A certificate of appealability was denied because the governing standard was not satisfied.
Key quotations
“A certificate will not be granted unless there is “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.”” (at 2)
Factual background
The source opinion contains no substantive factual discussion of the underlying criminal case or the claims raised in the § 2255 motion. The material procedural facts are that Terrell filed a § 2255 motion, the magistrate judge recommended denial and dismissal, and no party filed timely objections.
Procedural history
The action was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Dwane L. Tinsley under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). The magistrate judge recommended denial of Terrell's § 2255 motion and dismissal of the case. Neither party objected within the prescribed period, so the district court adopted the findings and recommendation, dismissed the action, and denied a certificate of appealability.