FRIEND EL v. SCHATZMAN et al

Filing 7

ORDER signed by CHIEF JUDGE WILLIAM L. OSTEEN JR. on 04/21/2015 adopting the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation, that Petitioner's § 2241 Petition (Doc. 2 ) is DISMISSED. A Judgment dismissing this action will be entered contem poraneously with this Order. Finding no substantial issue for appeal concerning the denial of a constitutional right affecting the conviction, nor a debatable procedural ruling, a certificate of appealability is not issued. FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner's Motion to Quash (Doc. 6 ) is DENIED. (Garland, Leah)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA

JONATHAN LARON FRIEND EL,
Petitioner,
v.
HEAD SHERIFF WILLIAM T.
SCHATZMAN, et al.,
Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

1:15CV182

ORDER
On March 3, 2015, the United States Magistrate Judge=s
Recommendation was filed and notice was served on the parties
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636.

(Docs. 3 and 4.) Petitioner filed

objections to the Recommendation.

(Doc. 5.)

Petitioner

subsequently filed a document entitled “Petition to Quash for
the Lack of Jurisdiction” (Doc. 6), which appears to restate
arguments contained in Petitioner’s Petition (compare id. at 1,
with Doc. 2 at 2).
The court has appropriately reviewed the portions of the
Magistrate Judge’s report to which objection was made and has
made a de novo determination in accord with the Magistrate
Judge’s report.

The court therefore adopts the Magistrate

Judge’s Recommendation.

Given that the court has already

considered and rejected the arguments contained within
Petitioner’s Motion to Quash, it will also deny that Motion.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Petitioner’s § 2241 Petition
(Doc. 2) is DISMISSED. A Judgment dismissing this action will be
entered contemporaneously with this Order. Finding no
substantial issue for appeal concerning the denial of a
constitutional right affecting the conviction, nor a debatable
procedural ruling, a certificate of appealability is not issued.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motion to Quash
(Doc. 6) is DENIED.
This the 21st day of April, 2015.

_____________________________________
United States District Judge

- 2 -