Opinion
Civil Action 5:22-CV-304
06-21-2023
HENRY FIORENTINO, Petitioner, v. R.M. WOLFE, and C. NUNLEY, Acting Warden, Respondents.
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
BAILEY, JUDGE
The above referenced case is before this Court upon the magistrate judge's recommendation that the Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 9] be granted, petitioner's Petition for Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 [Doc. 1] be denied and dismissed without prejudice, and the Motion Requesting Court to Intervene in Petitioner's Transfer [Doc. 11] be denied.
This Court is charged with conducting a de novo review of any portion of the magistrate judge's report to which a specific objection is registered, and may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendations contained in that report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). However, absent prompt objection by a dissatisfied party, it appears that Congress did not intend for the district court to review the factual and legal conclusions of the magistrate judge. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Additionally, any party who fails to file timely, written objections to the magistrate judge's report pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) waives the right to raise those objections at the appellate court level. United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91 (4th Cir. 1984), cert, denied, 467 U.S. 1208 (1984). No objections have been filed to the magistrate judge's report and recommendation.
A de novo review of the record indicates that the magistrate judge's report accurately summarizes this case and the applicable law. Accordingly, the magistrate judge's report and recommendation [Doc. 12] is ADOPTED. The Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 9] is hereby GRANTED, petitioner's Petition for Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 [Doc. 1]is DENIED AND DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, and the Motion Requesting Court to Intervene in Petitioner's Transfer [Doc. 11] is DENIED. This Court further DIRECTS the Clerk to STRIKE this case from the active docket of this Court.
It is so ORDERED.
The Clerk is directed to transmit copies of this Order to any counsel of record and to mail a copy to the pro se petitioner.