Dunlap v. Wilson
FINAL ORDER. It is ORDERED that the Court ADOPTS and APPROVES the Magistrate Judge's 13 Report and Recommendation as the Court's own opinion, except that the Court finds it unnecessary to make a finding that the Judgment and Commitment Or der is ambiguous as the rule in this circuit is that the oral pronouncement of the sentence controls. It is ORDERED that the 1 Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus be DENIED and DISMISSED with PREJUDICE and further ORDERED that judgment be entered in favor of Respondent. The Clerk is DIRECTED to forward a copy of this Order to Petitioner and counsel of record for Respondent. Signed by District Judge Mark S. Davis on 8/8/2017. Copies mailed 8/9/2017. (jmey, )
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGI NEA
AU6 - 8 2017
CLERK, US D'STRICT COURT
TRACY CALVIN DUNLAP JR.,
Civil Action No.:
Before the Court is a Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus filed
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, ECF No. 1.
In his Petition, the pro
se Petitioner seeks judicial review by this court to stop the Bureau
of Prisons from collecting funds from Petitioner's account to pay
his restitution ordered by the sentencing court.
On October 18, 2016, the Respondent filed a Motion to Dismiss
the Petition, ECF No. 5. The Petitioner filed a response on November
The matter was referred to a
United States Magistrate Judge
pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and (C) and
Eastern District of Virginia for report and recommendation.
dismissal of the petition.
ECF No. 13.
Each party was advised of
recommendations made by the Magistrate Judge.
On July 17, 2017, the
objections filed by Petitioner to the Report and Recommendation, and
having made de novo findings with respect to the portions objected
to, agrees with the Report and Recommendation on the grounds stated
by the Magistrate Judge and ADOPTS
Judge's Report and Recommendation filed on June 26,
Court's own opinion, except that the Court finds it unnecessary to
make a finding that the Judgment and Commitment Order is ambiguous
as the rule in this circuit is that the oral pronouncement of the
See Rakes v. United States, 309 F.2d 686, 687-88
(4th Cir. 1962); United States v. Parris, 639 F. App'x 923, 927 (4th
Cir. 2016) .
In this case, the oral sentence is clear that Petitioner
"has a financial obligation" as provided in 28 C.F.R. § 545.11.
is, therefore, ORDERED that the Petition, ECF No. 1, be DENIED and
DISMISSED with PREJUDICE and further ORDERED that judgment be entered
in favor of Respondent.
The Petitioner is hereby notified that he may appeal from the
judgment entered pursuant to this Final Order by filing a written
notice of appeal with the Clerk of the Court at the Walter E. Hoffman
United States Courthouse,
23510, within thirty (30) days from the date judgment is entered.
showing of the denial of a constitutional right pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 2253 (c) and Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 22 (b) (1) , the Court
declines to issue a certificate of appealability.
See Miller-El v.
Petitioner and counsel of record for Respondent.
Mark S. Davis
United States District Judge
Date: AwZJjmSV €j
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?