From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Escobar-Zuniga v. Purdue

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
Nov 28, 2016
Civil Action No. 1:14cv124 (N.D.W. Va. Nov. 28, 2016)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 1:14cv124

11-28-2016

GERMAN ESCOBAR-ZUNIGA, Petitioner, v. RUSSELL PURDUE, Warden, Respondent.


( ) ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION [DKT. NO. 14]

On July 22, 2014, the pro se plaintiff, German Escobar-Zuniga ("Escobar-Zuniga"), an inmate at FCI Hazelton, filed an Application for Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (dkt. no. 1), in which he challenges the validity of his conviction and sentence.

The Court referred this matter to United States Magistrate Judge John S. Kaull for initial screening and a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") in accordance with LR PL P 2. On August 26, 2015, Magistrate Judge Kaull issued his R&R, in which he concluded that Escobar-Zuniga's § 2241 petition must fail because it could not satisfy the savings clause of § 2255, a prerequisite to collaterally attacking his conviction (dkt. no. 14). Nor could he use a § 2241 petition to attack a sentencing issue Id. at 7. The R&R recommended that the Court deny Escobar-Zuniga's petition with prejudice. Id. at 10.

The R&R also specifically warned Escobar-Zuniga that his failure to object to the recommendation would result in the waiver of any appellate rights he might otherwise have on this issue. Id. The parties did not file any objections. Consequently, finding no clear error, the Court ADOPTS the R&R in its entirety (dkt. no. 14), and ORDERS that this case be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE and stricken from the Court's active docket.

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, 148-53 (1985); Wells v. Shriners Hosp., 109 F.3d 198, 199-200 (4th Cir. 1997). --------

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 the pro se petitioner, certified mail, return receipt requested. Dated: November 28, 2016.

/s/ Irene M. Keeley

IRENE M. KEELEY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Escobar-Zuniga v. Purdue

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
Nov 28, 2016
Civil Action No. 1:14cv124 (N.D.W. Va. Nov. 28, 2016)
Case details for

Escobar-Zuniga v. Purdue

Case Details

Full title:GERMAN ESCOBAR-ZUNIGA, Petitioner, v. RUSSELL PURDUE, Warden, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA

Date published: Nov 28, 2016

Citations

Civil Action No. 1:14cv124 (N.D.W. Va. Nov. 28, 2016)