Leveke v. Brown et al

Filing 19

ORDER ADOPTING 16 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: the respondent Brown's 13 Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED, the 1 Petition for Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 is DENIED AND DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, and petitioner� 39;s 17 Notice of Impending Custody Transfer is DENIED AS MOOT. The Clerk is DIRECTED TO STRIKE the matter from the active docket of this Court. Signed by District Judge John Preston Bailey on 2/5/2024. (copy to pro se petitioner via cm,rrr) (n mm) (Additional attachment(s) added on 2/5/2024: # 1 Certified Mail Return Receipt) (nmm). (Additional attachment(s) added on 2/5/2024: # 2 Certified Mail Return Receipt sent to updated address per Notice of Change of Address filed this same day) (nmm).

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
Wheeling
CODY RAY LEVEKE,
Petitioner,
v.

Civil Action No. 5:23-CV-265
Judge Bailey

WARDEN BROWN, and MARICOPA
COUNTY SHERIFF,
Respondents.
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
The above referenced case is before this Court upon the magistrate judge’s
recommendation thatthe respondent Brown’s Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 13] be
granted and the Petition for Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 2241 [Doc. 1] be

denied and dismissed with prejudice.
This Court is charged with conducting a de novo review of any portion of the
magistrate judge’s report to which a specific objection is registered, and may accept, reject,
or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendations contained in that report. 28 U.S.C.

§ 636(b)(1). However, absent prompt objection by a dissatisfied party, it appears that
Congress did not intend for the district court to review the factual and legal conclusions of
the magistrate judge. Thomas v. Am, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Additionally, any party who
fails to file timely, written objections to the magistrate judge’s report pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 636(b)(1) waives the right to raise those objections at the appellate court level. United

1

States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91(4th Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 467 U.S. 1208(1984). No
objections have been filed to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation.
A de novo review of the record indicates that the magistrate judge’s report
accurately summarizes this case and the applicable law. Accordingly, the magistrate
judge’s report and recommendation [Doc. 16] is ADOPTED. Moreover, the respondent
Brown’s Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 13] is GRANTED, the Petition for Habeas
Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 2241 [Dóc. 1] is DENIED AND DISMISSED WITH

PREJUDICE, and petitioner’s Notice of Impending Custody Transfer [Doc. 17] is DENIED
AS MOOT. The Clerk is DIRECTED TO STRIKE the above-styled mailer from the active
docket of this Court.
It is so ORDERED.
The Clerk is directed to transmit copies of this Orderto any counsel of record herein
and to send acopyto petitioner by certified mail, return receipt requested, to his last known
address as shown on the docket.
DATED: February

5.., 2024.

JOHN PRESTON BAILEY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2