Frazier v. Berkebile
Filing
5
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER ADOPTING PROPOSED FINDING AND RECOMMENDATION: The Court ADOPTS the 3 Proposed Finding and Recommendation by Magistrate Judge; the Court ORDERS that Petitioner's 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 2241 be DISMISSED and that this matter be REMOVED from the Court's docket. Signed by Judge Irene C. Berger on 7/18/2012. (cc: attys; any unrepresented party) (slr)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
BECKLEY DIVISION
ERIC SCOTT FRAZIER,
Petitioner,
v.
CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:10-cv-00115
D. BERKEBILE,
Respondent.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
ADOPTING PROPOSED FINDING AND RECOMMENDATION
The Court has reviewed the Petitioner=s Application Under 28 U.S.C. ' 2241 for Writ of
Habeas Corpus By a Person in State or Federal Custody (Document 1), wherein Petitioner seeks
review of his eligibility for early release under the Residential Drug Abuse Treatment program. By
Standing Order (Document 2) entered on February 3, 2010, this action was referred to the
Honorable R. Clarke VanDervort, United States Magistrate Judge, for submission to this Court of
proposed findings of fact and recommendation for disposition, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 636. On
June 28, 2012, the Magistrate Judge submitted Proposed Findings and Recommendation (“PF&R”)
(Document 3) wherein it is recommended that this Court dismiss the Petitioner’s petition as moot
and remove this matter from the Court’s docket.
The Court is not required to review, under a de novo or any other standard, the factual or
legal conclusions of the magistrate judge as to those portions of the findings or recommendation to
which no objections are addressed. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985). In addition, failure
to file timely objections constitutes a waiver of de novo review and the Petitioner=s right to appeal
this Court’s Order. 28 U.S.C. ' 636(b)(1); see also Snyder v. Ridenour, 889 F.2d 1363, 1366 (4th
Cir. 1989); United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91, 94 (4th Cir. 1984). Objections to the PF&R
were due by July 16, 2012. To date no party has filed any objections to the PF&R. As noted in
the PF&R, Petitioner appears to have been released from custody on July 29, 2011. Inasmuch as
Petitioner did not provide the Clerk’s Office with a forwarding address, the PF&R sent to him on
June 28, 2012 was returned as undeliverable (Document 4).
Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS and incorporates herein the findings and
recommendation of the Magistrate Judge as contained in the Proposed Findings and
Recommendation (Document 4). The Court ORDERS that Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of
Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Document 1) be DISMISSED and that this matter be
REMOVED from the Court’s docket.
The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to send a copy of this Order to Magistrate Judge
VanDervort, counsel of record, and any unrepresented party.
ENTER: July 18, 2012
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?