From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ogunyale v. Phillips

United States District Court, N.D. West Virginia
Apr 22, 2008
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:07CV165 (Judge Keeley) (N.D.W. Va. Apr. 22, 2008)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:07CV165 (Judge Keeley).

April 22, 2008


ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION


Before this Court is the issue of whether the pro se petitioner, Adewale Ogunyale ("Ogunyale"), is legally entitled to serve a certain amount of his sentence of incarceration in a halfway house. For the reasons stated below, the Court finds that he is not and ADOPTS the Report and Recommendations ("R R") in its entirety.

I. Procedural Posture

On November 30, 2007, Ogunyale filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The Court referred this matter to United States Magistrate Judge James E. Seibert for initial screening and an R R in accordance with Local Rule of Prisoner Litigation 83.09.

After initial review, on December 6, 2007, Magistrate Judge Seibert entered an order directing the respondent to show cause why the petition should not be granted. On January 7, 2008, the respondent filed a motion to dismiss. On January 25, 2008, Ogunyale filed a response and a motion for summary judgment. On April 7, 2008, Magistrate Judge Seibert entered an R R recommending that this Court grant the respondent's motion to dismiss, deny Ogunyale's motion for summary judgment, deny the petition, and dismiss this case with prejudice. On April 15, 2008, Ogunyale filed objections to the R R.

II. Legal Standard

This Court reviews de novo any portion of an R R to which any party objects, but may adopt portions of an R R to which no party objects without substantive review.

A party's failure to object to the Report and Recommendation not only waives its appellate rights on that issue, 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).

III. Ogunyale's Objections

IV. Analysis

18 U.S.C. 3624de novo18 U.S.C. §§ 362440814082 18 U.S.C. § 3621

Consequently, the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation in its entirety (dkt. no. 14), GRANTS respondent's motion (dkt. no. 7), DENIES Ogunyale's motion (dkt. no. 13), DENIES Ogunyale's petition, and DISMISSES this case WITH PREJUDICE. The Court orders the Clerk to STRIKE this case from the Court's docket.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

The Clerk is directed to mail a copy of this Order to the pro se petitioner via certified mail, return receipt requested and to transmit copies of this Order to counsel of record.


Summaries of

Ogunyale v. Phillips

United States District Court, N.D. West Virginia
Apr 22, 2008
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:07CV165 (Judge Keeley) (N.D.W. Va. Apr. 22, 2008)
Case details for

Ogunyale v. Phillips

Case Details

Full title:ADEWALE OGUNYALE, Petitioner v. WAYNE A. PHILLIPS, Warden, Respondent

Court:United States District Court, N.D. West Virginia

Date published: Apr 22, 2008

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:07CV165 (Judge Keeley) (N.D.W. Va. Apr. 22, 2008)

Citing Cases

Somerville v. Dewalt

As noted, Somerville has no constitutional right to serve his sentence in a facility more to his choosing for…

Roberts v. Dewalt

As noted, Roberts has no constitutional right to serve his sentence in a facility more to his choosing for…