Summary
holding that petitioner was "challenging the imposition of his sentence, rather than its execution" when he argued that "the District Court was without authority to 'amend his judgment' and request[ed] that th[e] Court[] 'vacate and remand the District Court's opinion []clarifying[] his judgment with respect to the payment of restitution'"
Summary of this case from Spears v. RiveraOpinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:09CV34.
July 9, 2009
ORDER ADOPTING OPINION/REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
On February 24, 2009, pro se petitioner, Randy Thomas Sowell ("Sowell"), filed a petition for habeas corpus relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The Court referred this matter to United States Magistrate Judge John S. Kaull for initial screening and a report and recommendation in accordance with Local Rule of Prisoner Litigation 83.09.
Following an order to show cause issued by Magistrate Judge Kaull, the defendant, Warden Kuma Deboo ("Deboo"), filed a motion to dismiss on April 10, 2009. After completion of the briefing on that motion, Magistrate Judge Kaull issued an Opinion and Report and Recommendation ("R R") on June 15, 2009, in which he recommended that the defendant's motion to dismiss be granted, Sowell's § 2241 petition be denied, and the case be dismissed with prejudice.
The R R also specifically warned Sowell that failure to object to the recommendation within ten days following his receipt of the R R would result in the waiver of any appellate rights on this issue. No objections have been filed by Sowell.
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).
The Court, therefore, ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation in its entirety (dkt. no. 17), GRANTS the motion to dismiss (dkt. no. 12), DENIES Sowell's petition under § 2241 (dkt. no. 1) and DISMISSES the case WITH PREJUDICE.
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 this Order to counsel of record and to mail a copy to the pro se petitioner, certified mail, return receipt requested.
Exhibit