Lennear v. Wilson

Filing 12

FINAL ORDER. It is ORDERED that the Court does hereby ADOPT and APPROVE the 9 Report and Recommendation in its entirety as the Court's own opinion. The Respondent's 5 Rule 5 Answer seeking denial and dismissal of the Petition is GRANTED, and the Petition is DENIED and DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. It is ORDERED that judgment be entered in favor of the Respondent. Signed by District Judge Mark S. Davis on 3/13/2018. Copies mailed 3/13/2018. (jmey, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Norfolk Division NICHOLAS LENNEAR, #56510-018, CLERK, US DiSTRiCT COURT NOP^OI.K. VA Petitioner, V. Civil Action No. ERIC D. 2:17cvl35 WILSON, Respondent. FINAL ORDER Before the Court is a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, ECF No. 1, filed pursuant to Respondent's Rule 5 Answer. his 28 U.S.C. ECF No. institutional conviction for 5. § 2241, and the Petitioner challenges "Conduct which disrupts to the orderly running of the institution most like engaging in a group demonstration," Petitioner, of ECF No. 1 at 12, as among other sanctions, Good Conduct a lost result of which twenty-seven (27) the days Time. The matter was referred for disposition to a United States Magistrate Judge Federal Rule of the April Matters to 2, Magistrate Civil 2002 United Recommendation pursuant 28 U.S.C. Procedure 72(b), Standing States entered Judge to on Order Magistrate February recommended that §§ Local on 636(b)(1)(B)-(C), Civil Rule 72, Assignment Judges. In 6, ECF the 2018, relief a of and Certain Report and No. 9, the sought by the Respondent's and the Rule 5 Answer (denial and dismissal) be granted, Petition be denied and dismissed with prejudice. The parties were advised of their right to file written objections to the Report and Recommendation. Court received the notes in its February 21, Petitioner's objections which, Response Recommendation, On to Plaintiff's 2018, the as Respondent Objection to Report and appear to have been timely filed insofar as the postmark on Petitioner's submission reflects a date of February 22, 2018. United States v. (4th Cir. 10, 11 2013) at fn. (discussing 1. On McNeill, 523 F. App'x 979, "prison mailbox rule"). March 7, 2018, the Court Respondent's response to Petitioner's objections. The Court, having reviewed the record ECF 981 Nos. received the ECF No. 11. and examined the objections filed by Petitioner to the Report and Recommendation, and the made ^ Respondent's response to those objections, and having novo findings with respect to the portions objected to, does hereby ADOPT and APPROVE the Report and Recommendation, No. 9, in its entirety as the Court's own opinion. ECF Accordingly, the Respondent's Rule 5 Answer seeking denial and dismissal of the Petition, 1, ECF No. 5, is GRANTED, and the Petition, is DENIED and DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. It is ECF No. ORDERED that judgment be entered in favor of the Respondent. The Petitioner is hereby notified that he may appeal from 2 the judgment entered pursuant to this Final Order by filing a written notice Walter E. Norfolk, judgment of appeal with the Clerk Hoffman United States Courthouse, Virginia 23510, is demonstrate entered. a within thirty Because substantial the of Appellate of 22(b)(1), Court days Petitioner showing Procedure the The 322, 335-36 Clerk the has denial § 2253(c) the failed Court of declines to Cockrell, to forward a copy of this Order to I t i s so ORDERED. M Mark S. Davis United States District Judge Mark S. Davis United States District Judge ^ a and Federal the Petitioner and counsel of record for the Respondent. Date: to (2003). is DIRECTED Norfolk, Virginia the from the date issue a certificate of appealability. See Miller-El v. 537 U.S. at 600 Granby Street, (30) constitutional right pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Rule of

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?