Holmes v. Flournoy
Filing
28
ORDER ADOPTING 26 Report and Recommendations of the Magistrate Judge as the opinion of the Court. The Court DIMISSES in part and DENIES in part Holmes' Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to enter the appropriate judgment of dismissal and to CLOSE this case. Signed by Judge Lisa G. Wood on 8/28/2017. (ca)
Sn
{[Kntteb States! Btsitrtct Court
:lfor
^out][ient Btotnct ot (f^eorstu
Prunototck litbtoton
JAMES COURY HOLMES,
Petitioner,
CIVIL ACTION NO.: 2:15-cv-l 12
V.
JOHN V.FLOURNOY,
Respondent.
ORDER
Presently before the Court is the Magistrate Judge's August
8, 2017, Report and Recommendation, dkt. no. 26, to which
Petitioner James Coury Holmes {^''Holmes") filed an Objection,
dkt. no. 27.
Holmes' Objection reiterates an argument presented
in his Petition.
Specifically, Holmes argues that the
sentencing court failed to order that his restitution was due
'"immediately" during his sentencing.
As a result. Holmes
contends the sentencing court improperly delegated its authority
to determine his restitution payment schedule to the Bureau of
Prisons.
As the Magistrate Judge correctly concluded in the
Report and Recommendation, Petitioner may not pursue such a
A0 72A
(Rev. 8/82)
claim via Section 2241, as it concerns the validity of his
sentence.
Therefore, after an independent and de novo review of the
entire record, the Court CONCURS with the Magistrate Judge,
ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation as the opinion of the
Court, and OVERRULES Holmes' Objection.
Consequently, the Court
DISMISSES in part and DENIES in part Holmes' Petition for Writ
of Habeas Corpus, filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C, ยง 2241.
Additionally, the Court DENIES Holmes leave to appeal in forma
pauperis.
The Court DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to enter the
appropriate judgment of dismissal and tg CLOSE this case.
SO ORDERED, this
, 2017.
day of
. LISA GODBEY WOOD, JUDGE
TED /STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN
DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
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?