Leandre v. Department of Corrections (Tallahassee) et al, No. 2:2015cv05577 - Document 6 (S.D.W. Va. 2016)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER accepting and incorporating the 5 Proposed Findings and Recommendations by Magistrate Judge and orders judgment consistent therewith; denying the petitioner's 1 Petition for Writ of Mandamus; the court further construes the petition as a Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 and ORDERS this matter TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Jacksonville Division. Signed by Judge Joseph R. Goodwin on 1/4/2016. (cc: petitioner; counsel of record; any unrepresented party) (taq)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Leandre v. Department of Corrections (Tallahassee) et al Doc. 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON DIVISION GREGORY LEANDRE, Petitioner, v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:15-cv-5577 DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, et al., Respondents. MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER This action was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Dwane L. Tinsley for submission of proposed findings of fact and recommendations for disposition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. On October 29, 2015, Judge Tinsley submitted his Proposed Findings and Recommendations [ECF No. 5] (“PF&R”) and recommended that the court DENY the petitioner’s Petition for a Writ of Mandamus [ECF No. 1]. The PF&R further recommended that the court construe the petition as a Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 and TRANSFER this matter to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Jacksonville Division, where the petitioner is in custody and where the Petition would properly be filed. No party filed objections to the PF&R. A district court “shall 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)(C). This court is not, however, required to review, under a de novo or any other standard, Dockets.Justia.com the factual or legal conclusions of the magistrate judge as to those portions of the findings or recommendation to which no objections are addressed. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985). Because the parties have not filed objections, the court ACCEPTS and INCORPORATES herein the PF&R and orders judgment consistent therewith. The court DENIES the petitioner’s Petition for a Writ of Mandamus [ECF No. 1]. The court further construes the petition as a Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 and ORDERS this matter be TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Jacksonville Division. The court DIRECTS the Clerk to send a copy of this Order to counsel of record and any unrepresented party. ENTER: 2 January 4, 2016
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
