Johnson v. McGinley

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

ARMONI MASUD JOHNSON, No. 3:21-CV-01280

Petitioner, (Chief Judge Brann)

v. (Chief Magistrate Judge Mehalchick)

SUPERINTENDENT THOMAS MCGINLEY, et al.,

Respondents.

ORDER NOVEMBER 23, 2022 Armoni Masud Johnson, a Pennsylvania state prisoner, filed this 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition related to the denial of his request for parole.1 In October 2022, Chief Magistrate Judge Karoline Mehalchick issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that this Court deny the petition.2 Johnson has filed timely objections to the Report and Recommendation.3 “If a party objects timely to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, the district court must ‘make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.’”4 Regardless of whether timely objections are made, district courts may accept, reject,

1 Doc. 1. 2 Doc. 42. 3 Doc. 45. 4 Equal Emp’t Opportunity Comm’n v. City of Long Branch, 866 F.3d 93, 99 (3d Cir. 2017) or modify—in whole or in part—the magistrate judge’s findings or recommendations.5 Upon de novo review, the Court finds no error in Chief

Magistrate Judge Mehalchick’s Report and Recommendation. Consequently, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. Chief Magistrate Judge Karoline Mehalchick’s Report and

Recommendation (Doc. 42) is ADOPTED; 2. Johnson’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition (Doc. 1) is DENIED; 3. Johnson’s motions to supplement the complaint (Docs. 40, 51) are GRANTED;

4. Johnson’s motion to recall the mandate (Doc. 37), motion for injunctive relief (Doc. 39), and motion pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 9 (Doc. 43), are DENIED;

5. The Court declines to issue certificate of appealability;6 and 6. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case.

BY THE COURT:

s/ Matthew W. Brann Matthew W. Brann Chief United States District Judge

5 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Local Rule 72.31.