Edinborough v. Haynes
Filing
13
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 9 Report and Recommendations; the Petitioner's objections are w/out merit and are overruled. That portion of the petition seeking relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 2241 as it relates to Edinbor ough's Fed Prison Camp placement is denied. The civil rights claims set forth in the petition are dismissed w/out prejudice. The Clerk is authorized and directed to enter the appropriate Judgment. Signed by Chief Judge Lisa G. Wood on 6/29/2010. (order was mailed to Petitioner at Fed Satellite Low, Jeusp, GA) (ca)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA BRUNSWICK DIVISION
CLYDE EDINBOROUGH, Petitioner, vs. ANTHONY HAYNES, Warden, Respondent. CIVIL ACTION NO.: CV2I0-026
ORDER After an independent and de novo review of the record, the undersigned concurs with the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, to which Objections have been filed. In his Objections, Petitioner asserts that 28 U.S.C. § 2241 is the proper vehicle for challenging his place of incarceration, and that he is qualified to be considered for placement in a less secured facility. Decisions regarding a petitioner's security classification are discretionary functions of the Bureau of Prisons. Plaintiffs Objections are without merit and are OVERRULLED. The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is adopted as the opinion of the Court. That portion of the petition seeking relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 as it relates to Edinborough's Federal Prison Camp placement is DENIED. The civil rights claims set
AO 72A (Rev. 8/82)
forth in the petition are dismissed without prejudice. The Clerk is authorized and directed to enter the appropriate Judgment. SO ORDERED, this day of , 2010.
ODBEY WOOD, CHIEF JUDGE D STATES DISTRICT COURT -IERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
AO 72A (Rev. I82)
1
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?