Parks v. O'Brien

Filing 13

ORDER Adopting Report and Recommendation. The Court adopts the Magistrate Judge's 11 Report and Recommendation in its entirety, denies the 1 2241 Petition and orders that this case be dismissed with prejudice and stricken from the Court 9;s docket. The Clerk is directed to enter a separate judgment in this matter. Signed by District Judge Irene M. Keeley on 9/24/12. (Copy PS Petitioner via cert. mail)(mh) (Additional attachment(s) added on 9/24/2012: # 1 Certified Mail Return Receipt) (mh).

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
LUTHER PARKS,
Petitioner,
v.

//

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:12CV73
(Judge Keeley)

TERRY O’BRIEN, Warden,
Respondent.
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
On April 30, 2012, the pro
(“Parks”),

filed

a

petition

se

pursuant

petitioner, Luther Parks
to

28

U.S.C.

§

2241,

challenging the use of prior state convictions for which he was not
incarcerated to trigger a sentencing enhancement for his federal
firearms offense (dkt. no. 1). The Court referred this matter to
United

States

Magistrate

Judge

James

E.

Seibert

for

initial

screening and a report and recommendation in accordance with LR PL
P 2.
Magistrate Judge Seibert issued an Opinion and Report and
Recommendation (“R&R”) on July 2, 2012, in which he recommended
that the petitioner’s § 2241 petition be denied and dismissed with
prejudice. (Dkt. No. 11). Pursuant to In re Jones, 226 F.3d 328
(4th Cir. 2000), Magistrate Judge Seibert determined that Parks is
not entitled to file the instant § 2241 petition because he has not
established that § 2255 is an inadequate or ineffective remedy for
his claims.
The R&R also specifically warned Parks that his failure to

PARKS v. O’BRIEN

1:12CV73

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
object to the recommendation would result in the waiver of any
appellate rights he might otherwise have on this issue. He did not
file any objections.* Accordingly, finding no clear error, the
Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation in its entirety (dkt.
no. 11), DENIES the § 2241 petition (dkt. no 1) and ORDERS that
this case be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE and stricken from the Court’s
docket.
It is so ORDERED.
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 58, the Court directs the Clerk of
Court to enter a separate judgment order and to transmit copies of
both orders to counsel of record and to the pro se petitioner,
certified mail, return receipt requested.
Dated: September 24, 2012.

/s/ Irene M. Keeley
IRENE M. KEELEY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

*

The failure to object to the Report and Recommendation not only waives
the appellate rights in this matter, but also relieves the Court of any
obligation to conduct a de novo review of the issue presented. See Thomas
v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 148-153 (1985); Wells v. Shriners Hosp., 109 F.3d
198, 199-200 (4th Cir. 1997).

2