Calderon v. Bradley

Filing 12

MEMORANDUM OPINION - The Court adopts the magistrate judge's analysis with respect to Ms. Calderon's failure to exhaust and state a colorable constitutional claim. Therefore, the Court denies Ms. Calderons § 2241 habeas petition. A separate order will be entered. Signed by Judge Madeline Hughes Haikala on 10/24/2019. (KEK)

FILED
2019 Oct-24 PM 12:33
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
WESTERN DIVISION
NYSSA K. CALDERON,
Petitioner,
v.
PATRICIA V. BRADLEY, Warden,
Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 7:17-cv-1182-MHH-SGC

MEMORANDUM OPINION
On August 19, 2019, the magistrate judge entered a report in which she
recommended that the Court deny Ms. Calderon’s § 2241 petition because Ms.
Calderon did not exhaust her administrative remedies and because Ms. Calderon has
not stated a colorable constitutional claim for a due process or equal protection
violation. (Doc. 10). The magistrate judge advised Ms. Calderon of her right to file
specific written objections within 14 days. (Doc. 10). The Court has not received
objections, probably because the U.S. Postal Service returned Ms. Calderon’s copy
of the report and recommendation which the Clerk of Court mailed to her address of
record, as undeliverable. (Doc. 11).1

1

Ms. Calderon was a federal prisoner confined at the Federal Correctional Institution in Aliceville,
Alabama when she filed this action. (Doc. 1, p. 1). According to records available on the website
for the Federal Bureau of Prisons, BOP released Ms. Calderon from incarceration on September
20, 2018. She has not provided an updated address to the court.

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).
The Court adopts the magistrate judge’s analysis with respect to Ms.
Calderon’s failure to exhaust and state a colorable constitutional claim. Therefore,
the Court denies Ms. Calderon’s § 2241 habeas petition.
A separate order will be entered.
DONE this 24th day of October, 2019.

_________________________________
MADELINE HUGHES HAIKALA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2