From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hagos v. Sessions

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA MIDDLE DIVISION
Mar 13, 2018
Case No. 4:18-cv-0034-MHH-TMP (N.D. Ala. Mar. 13, 2018)

Opinion

Case No. 4:18-cv-0034-MHH-TMP

03-13-2018

MESMER HAGOS, Petitioner, v. ATTORNEY GENERAL JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS, III, et al., Respondents.


MEMORANDUM OPINION

On February 26, 2018, the magistrate judge filed a report in which he recommended that the Court dismiss as moot petitioner Mesmer Hagos's 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition for writ of habeas corpus. (Doc. 9). The magistrate judge advised the parties of their right to file objections within 14 days. (Doc. 9, pp. 2-3). To date, no party has filed objections to the magistrate judge's report and recommendation.

On February 26, 2018, the Clerk of Court mailed to Mr. Hagos a copy of the magistrate judge's report and recommendation. (February 26, 2018 staff note). On March 12, 2018, the Postal Service returned as undeliverable Mr. Hagos's copy of the report and recommendation. (Doc. 10; Doc. 11).

A district court "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). A district court reviews legal conclusions in a report de novo and reviews for plain error factual findings to which no objection is made. Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993); see also LoConte v. Dugger, 847 F.2d 745, 749 (11th Cir. 1988); Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 Fed. Appx. 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006).

When a party objects to a report in which a magistrate judge recommends dismissal of the action, a district court must "make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made." 28 U.S.C. §§ 636(b)(1)(B)-(C). --------

Having reviewed the record in this case, including the report and recommendation, the Court finds no misstatements of law in the report and no plain error in the magistrate judge's description of the relevant facts. Therefore, the Court adopts the magistrate judge's report and accepts his recommendation.

The Court will enter a separate final order consistent with this memorandum opinion.

DONE and ORDERED this March 13, 2018.

/s/_________

MADELINE HUGHES HAIKALA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Hagos v. Sessions

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA MIDDLE DIVISION
Mar 13, 2018
Case No. 4:18-cv-0034-MHH-TMP (N.D. Ala. Mar. 13, 2018)
Case details for

Hagos v. Sessions

Case Details

Full title:MESMER HAGOS, Petitioner, v. ATTORNEY GENERAL JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS, III…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA MIDDLE DIVISION

Date published: Mar 13, 2018

Citations

Case No. 4:18-cv-0034-MHH-TMP (N.D. Ala. Mar. 13, 2018)