Thomas v. Wilcher

Filing 7

ORDER ADOPTING #5 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS of the Magistrate Judge as the opinion of this Court. Petitioner's #1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is dismissed and Petitioner is denied in forma pauperis status on appeal. The Clerk is directed to close this case. Signed by Chief District Judge R. Stan Baker on 3/7/2025. (amd)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
SAVANNAH DIVISION
CHRISTIAN THOMAS,
Petitioner,

CIVIL ACTION NO.: 4:25-cv-8

v.
SHERIFF JOHN T. WILCHER,
Respondent.
ORDER
Before the Court is the Magistrate Judge’s January 21, 2025 Report and Recommendation,
(doc. 5), to which objections have been filed, (doc. 6). The Magistrate Judge recommended that
pro se Petitioner Christian Thomas’ 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition be dismissed because it appeared
from the face of the Petition that Thomas had failed to exhaust available state remedies and his
prosecution was pending. (See generally doc. 5.) Thomas’ Objection includes a number of
documents related to his state prosecution, the relevance of which is not entirely clear, and what
appears to be a copy of a state habeas petition, (doc. 6, pp. 39-40). The Objection, however, does
not indicate that his state habeas petition has been resolved, assuming that it was ever even filed.
(See id., pp. 4-5.) The remainder of the Objection appears to dispute the merits of the underlying
state prosecution. (Id., pp. 1-4.) The Objection, therefore, does not dispute the applicable law nor
the Magistrate Judge’s application of that law. After a careful de novo review, the Court agrees
with the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation. The Court, therefore, ADOPTS the Report and
Recommendation, (doc. 5), as its opinion. Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is
DISMISSED. (Doc. 1.)

Applying the Certificate of Appealability (COA) standards, which are set forth in Brown
v. United States, 2009 WL 307872 at * 1-2 (S.D. Ga. Feb. 9, 2009), the Court discerns no COAworthy issues at this stage of the litigation, so no COA should issue. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1); see
Alexander v. Johnson, 211 F.3d 895, 898 (5th Cir. 2000) (approving sua sponte denial of COA
before movant filed a notice of appeal). And, as there are no non-frivolous issues to raise on
appeal, an appeal would not be taken in good faith. Thus, in forma pauperis status on appeal is
likewise DENIED. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). The Clerk is DIRECTED to CLOSE this case.
SO ORDERED, this 7th day of March, 2025.

R. STAN BAKER, CHIEF JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

2