Campbell v. Coakley

Filing 11

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: The Court ADOPTS and incorporates herein the findings and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge as contained in the 10 Proposed Findings and Recommendation, and ORDERS that the Petitioner's 1 Application Unde r 28 U.S.C. Section 2241 for Writ of Habeas Corpus By a Person in State or Federal Custody be DISMISSED and this matter be REMOVED from the Court's docket. Signed by Judge Irene C. Berger on 02/13/2017. (cc: USMJ Aboulhosn; attys; any unrepresented party) (msa)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
BECKLEY DIVISION

DAVID ATREYEL CAMPBELL,
Petitioner,
v.

CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:16-cv-02058

JOE COAKLEY,
Respondent.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On March 3, 2016, the Petitioner, acting pro se, filed his Application Under 28 U.S.C. §
2241 for Writ of Habeas Corpus By a Person in State or Federal Custody (Document 1).
By Standing Order (Document 2) entered on March 4, 2016, this action was referred to the
Honorable Omar J. Aboulhosn, 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
January 18, 2017, the Magistrate Judge submitted a Proposed Findings and Recommendation
(Document 10) wherein it is recommended that this Court dismiss the Petitioner’s Application
Under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 for Writ of Habeas Corpus By a Person in State or Federal Custody and
remove this matter from the Court’s docket. Objections to the Magistrate Judge=s Proposed
Findings and Recommendation were due by February 6, 2017.
Neither party has timely filed objections to the Magistrate Judge=s Proposed Findings and
Recommendation. The Court is not required to review, under a de novo or any other standard, the
1

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).
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).
Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS and incorporates herein the findings and
recommendation of the Magistrate Judge as contained in the Proposed Findings and
Recommendation, and ORDERS that 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) be DISMISSED
and this matter be REMOVED from the Court’s docket.
The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to send a certified copy of this Order to Magistrate Judge
Aboulhosn, counsel of record, and any unrepresented party.
ENTER:

2

February 13, 2017