St. John v. Anderson
ORDER adopting 11 Report and Recommendations and adopting 13 Supplemental Report and Recommendations, petition dismissed without prejudice; denying 2 motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. (Schroeppel, Kerry)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI SOUTHERN DIVISION WILLIAM ROY ST. JOHN, Petitioner, v. MARTY C. ANDERSON, Warden, United States Medical Center for Federal Prisoners, Respondent. ) ) ) ) Civil Action ) No. 10-3004-CV-S-RED-H ) ) )
ORDER AND JUDGMENT Pursuant to the governing law and in accordance with Local Rule 72.1 of the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri, the petition herein for a writ of habeas corpus was referred to the United States Magistrate for preliminary review under the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). The United States Magistrate has completed his preliminary review of the petition and has submitted to the undersigned a report and recommendation that the petition for writ of habeas corpus be dismissed without prejudice. Petitioner has filed written exceptions to the report and recommendation of the Magistrate in which he reasserts the allegations of his original petition. Having fully reviewed the record de novo, this Court agrees with the Magistrate that the petitioner has failed to fully exhaust administrative remedies. Based on the file and records in this case, it is concluded that the findings of fact, conclusions of law, and proposed actions of the Magistrate are correct and should be approved. It is therefore ORDERED that petitioner's exceptions filed herein should be, and they are hereby, OVERRULED. It is further
ORDERED that petitioner should be, and he is hereby, denied leave to proceed in forma pauperis. It is further ADJUDGED that the petition herein for a writ of habeas corpus should be, and is hereby, dismissed without prejudice.
/s/ Richard E. Dorr RICHARD E. DORR United States District Judge Date: June 2, 2010
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?