Gutierrez v. U.S. Immigration Customs Enforcement

Filing 26

MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Madeline Hughes Haikala on 8/30/2016. (KAM, )

FILED
2016 Aug-30 AM 09:49
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
MIDDLE DIVISION
LEONARDO GUTIERREZ,
Petitioner,
v.
U.S. IMMIGRATION CUSTOMS
ENFORCEMENT and THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE
STATE OF ALABAMA,
Respondents.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case Number: 4:13-cv-01074-MHH-JHE

MEMORANDUM OPINION
On June 10, 2015, the magistrate judge entered a Report and Recommendation, (Doc.
23), recommending that the petition for writ of habeas corpus be dismissed without prejudice.
On July 5, 2016, the Court received correspondence from the petitioner indicating he had been
transferred and may have not been receiving mail. (Doc. 24). On July 11, 2016, the Court resent
the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation to the petitioner. The time to file objections
to the report and recommendation has passed, and no objections have been filed.
A district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or part, the findings or
recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). A district court
reviews legal conclusions in a report de novo and reviews for plain error factual findings to
which no objection is made. Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993); see also

LoConte v. Dugger, 847 F.2d 745, 749 (11th Cir. 1988); Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 Fed. Appx.
781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006).1
Having considered the record in this case, including the report and recommendation, the
Court adopts the recommendation that the Court should dismiss Mr. Gutierrez’s petition for writ
of habeas corpus because “[t]here is nothing in the record to indicate” that Mr. Gutierrez “would
not be removed within a reasonable time of him ceasing to stay the removal period” through his
actions. (Doc. 23, p. 7). The Court will enter a separate dismissal order.
DONE and ORDERED this August 30, 2016.

_________________________________
MADELINE HUGHES HAIKALA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

1

When a party objects to a report in which a magistrate judge recommends dismissal of the action, a 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.” 28 U.S.C. §§ 636(b)(1)(B)-(C).
2