Opinion
Civil Action 3:21-CV-1610
03-25-2022
RAHEEM BRENNERMAN, Petitioner, v. RACHEL THOMPSON, WARDEN, Respondent.
Carlson, Judge
ORDER
Robert D. Mariani United States District Judge
AND NOW, THIS 24th DAY OF MARCH 2022, upon review of Magistrate Judge Martin C. Carlson's March 14, 2022, Report and Recommendation ("R&R") (Doc. 21) for clear error or manifest injustice, Petitioner's responsive correspondence of March 18, 2022 (Doc. 22), and all relevant documents, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1. The R&R (Doc. 21) is ADOPTED for the reasons set forth therein.
2. Petitioner's claimed exhaustion of administrative remedies set out in his March 18, 2022, correspondence (Doc. 22 at 1) has no bearing on Magistrate Judge Carlson's recommended disposition in that exhaustion is a prerequisite to habeas relief and, therefore, petitioners must "exhaust their administrative remedies before petitioning for a writ of habeas corpus." Moscato v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 98 F.3d 757, 760 (3d Cir. 1996) (citing Bradshaw v. Carlson, 682 F.2d 1050, 1052 (3d Cir. 1981) (per curiam)) (emphasis added). Therefore, to the extent Petitioner's correspondence informing the Court that he has now exhausted his administrative remedies is considered an objection to the R&R's recommended disposition, the objection is OVERRULED;
3. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
4. There is no basis for the issuance ofa, certificate of appealability.