ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
VINCENT L. BRICCETTI, District Judge.
Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Lisa M. Smith's Report and Recommendation ("R&R"), dated August 9, 2013, on petitioner Akilah Whitley's petition for a writ of habeas corpus, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, from her November 14, 2007, conviction in Westchester County Court. (Doc. #19). Judge Smith recommended the Court deny the petition.
The Court presumes familiarity with the factual and procedural background of this case.
For the following reasons, the Court adopts the R&R as the opinion of the Court, and denies the petition.
A district court reviewing a magistrate judge's report and recommendation "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Parties may raise objections to the magistrate judge's report and recommendation, but they must be "specific[, ] written, " and submitted within 14 days after being served with a copy of the recommended disposition. Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(2); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
Insofar as a report and recommendation deals with a dispositive motion, a district court must conduct a de novo review of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which timely objections are made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The district court may adopt those portions of a report and recommendation to which no timely objections have been made, provided no clear error is apparent from the face of the record. Lewis v. Zon , 573 F.Supp.2d 804, 811 (S.D.N.Y. 2008); Nelson v. Smith , 618 F.Supp. 1186, 1189 (S.D.N.Y. 1985). The clearly erroneous standard also applies when a party makes only conclusory or general objections, or simply reiterates her original arguments. Ortiz v. Barkley , 558 F.Supp.2d 444, 451 (S.D.N.Y. 2008).
By Order dated September 3, 2013 (Doc. #21), the Court granted petitioner's application for an extension of time to object to the R&R until October 25, 2013.
Petitioner did not object to Judge Smith's thorough and well-reasoned decision.
The Court has carefully reviewed the R&R and finds no error, clear or otherwise.
Accordingly, the R&R is adopted in its entirety as the opinion of the Court.
The petition for a writ of habeas corpus is DENIED.
The Clerk is instructed to enter judgment accordingly and close this case.
As petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, a certificate of appealability will not issue. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); Love ...