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).

Download PDF
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

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?