Gomez v. Nash

Filing 12

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 10 Report and Recommendations. The Court adopts the Report and Recommendation 10 of United States Magistrate Judge F. Keith Ball as the opinion of the Court. Gomez's habeas petition is dismissed. A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58. Signed by Chief District Judge Daniel P. Jordan, III on 4/30/2019 (VM)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI NORTHERN DIVISION ENRIQUE VILLA GOMEZ V. PETITIONER CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:18-CV-237-DPJ-FKB WARDEN CHERON RESPONDENT ORDER This habeas petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 is before the Court on the unopposed Report and Recommendation [10] of United States Magistrate Judge F. Keith Ball. Judge Ball recommended that Petitioner Enrique Villa Gomez’s petition regarding the Federal Bureau of Prisons’ calculation of his sentence be dismissed as moot because Gomez was released from custody on July 9, 2018. Report & Recommendation [10]; see Pet’r’s Mem. [2] at 4 (seeking “Credit For Time Served”); Belasco v. Warden, Fed. Corr. Inst. Big Spring, 156 F. App’x 671 (5th Cir. 2005) (finding appeal from dismissal of § 2241 petition “challenging the method used by the Bureau of Prisons . . . for calculating good-time credits” moot upon petitioner’s release from federal custody). Gomez failed to file an objection to the Report and Recommendation, and the time to do so has now expired.1 Because the Court agrees with Judge Ball that Gomez’s habeas petition is now moot, it adopts the Report and Recommendation [10] as the opinion of the Court. Gomez’s habeas petition is dismissed. A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58. SO ORDERED AND ADJUDGED this the 30th day of April, 2019. s/ Daniel P. Jordan III CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 1 The copy of the Report and Recommendation the Court mailed to Gomez was returned as undeliverable. Notice [11].

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?