From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Harris v. Oddo

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
Aug 22, 2017
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:15CV64 (N.D.W. Va. Aug. 22, 2017)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:15CV64

08-22-2017

NAKIE HARRIS, Petitioner, v. LEONARD ODDO, Respondent.


( ) ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION [DKT. NO. 22]

On April 13, 2015, the pro se petitioner, Nakie Harris ("Harris"), filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2241, which the Court referred to United States Magistrate Judge Michael J. Aloi for initial screening and a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") in accordance with LR PL P 2.

On July 10, 2017, Magistrate Judge Aloi issued an R&R, in which he recommended that the Court deny and dismiss Harris's petition for lack of jurisdiction (dkt. no. 22 at 9). The Clerk originally mailed the R&R to FCI Hazelton at the address of record for Harris. On July 17, 2017, Harris filed a notice informing the Court that he had moved to FCI Leavenworth, Kansas. Consequently, the original mailing of the R&R was returned as undeliverable on July 21, 2017. In possession of the new address for Harris, the Clerk re-mailed the R&R, which was accepted by Harris at FCI Leavenworth on August 4, 2017 (dkt. no. 28).

The R&R also specifically warned Harris he had fourteen days in which to file any written objections to the R&R, and that his failure to object to the recommendation would result in the waiver of any appellate rights he might otherwise have on this issue (dkt. no. 22 at 9). The parties did not timely file any objections. Consequently, finding no clear error, the Court ADOPTS the R&R in its entirety (Dkt. No. 22), DENIES the petition (dkt. no. 1), and ORDERS that this case be DISMISSED WITHOUT 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, 148-153 (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 the pro se petitioner, certified mail, return receipt requested. Dated: August 22, 2017.

/s/ Irene M. Keeley

IRENE M. KEELEY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Harris v. Oddo

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
Aug 22, 2017
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:15CV64 (N.D.W. Va. Aug. 22, 2017)
Case details for

Harris v. Oddo

Case Details

Full title:NAKIE HARRIS, Petitioner, v. LEONARD ODDO, Respondent.

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

Date published: Aug 22, 2017

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:15CV64 (N.D.W. Va. Aug. 22, 2017)