From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Horton v. Wilson

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Norfolk Division
Dec 5, 2017
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:17cv177 (E.D. Va. Dec. 5, 2017)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:17cv177

12-05-2017

LESIA ROSHAD HORTON, #56612-056 Petitioner, v. ERIC D. WILSON, Warden FCC Petersburg Medium Respondent.


FINAL ORDER

This matter was initiated by petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The petition challenges a decision by the Bureau of Prisons ("BOP") which denied Petitioner access to a discretionary sentence reduction available to inmates who complete a residential drug treatment program.

The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and (C) and Rule 72 of the Rules of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia for report and recommendation. Report of the Magistrate Judge was filed on November 8, 2017, recommending dismissal of the petition because the BOP's decision is not subject to judicial review under the Administrative Procedures Act and Horton's claims fail to plausibly allege a constitutional or legal defect in the BOP's enactment or application of the relevant regulations. By copy of the report, each party was advised of his right to file written objections to the findings and recommendations made by the Magistrate Judge. The court has received no objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation and the time for filing objections has now expired.

Accordingly, the court does hereby accept the findings and recommendations set forth in the report of the United States Magistrate Judge filed November 8, 2017, and it is, therefore ORDERED that respondent's Motion to Dismiss be GRANTED, and that the petition be DENIED and DISMISSED with prejudice.

Petitioner may appeal from the judgment entered pursuant to this Final Order by filing a written notice of appeal with the Clerk of this court, United States Courthouse, 600 Granby Street, Norfolk, Virginia 23510, within sixty (60) days from the date of entry of such judgment.

Petitioner has failed to demonstrate "a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right," therefore, the Court declines to issue any certificate of appealability pursuant to Rule 22(b) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 1039 (2003).

The Clerk shall mail a copy of this Final Order to Petitioner and provide an electronic copy of the Final order to counsel of record for Respondent.

/s/_________

RAYMOND A. JACKSON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Norfolk, Virginia
December 5, 2017


Summaries of

Horton v. Wilson

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Norfolk Division
Dec 5, 2017
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:17cv177 (E.D. Va. Dec. 5, 2017)
Case details for

Horton v. Wilson

Case Details

Full title:LESIA ROSHAD HORTON, #56612-056 Petitioner, v. ERIC D. WILSON, Warden FCC…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Norfolk Division

Date published: Dec 5, 2017

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:17cv177 (E.D. Va. Dec. 5, 2017)