Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by

MICHAEL THOMPSON, Petitioner, v. STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA, Respondent.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

JOHN COPENHAVER JR., District Judge

The court having received the Proposed Findings and Recommendation ("PF R") of the United States Magistrate Judge filed on December 14, 2010, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B); and having reviewed the record in this proceeding; and there being no objections filed by either the respondent or the petitioner to the PF R; and it appearing proper so to do, it is ORDERED that the findings and conclusions made in the PF R be, and they hereby are, adopted by the court.

On January 10, 2011, the court ordered that the PF R be sent to petitioner's new address after the return by the United States Postal Service of the earlier mailing of the PF R to his former place of incarceration. By that order, petitioner was given leave to file objections until January 25, 2011.

It is, accordingly, ORDERED that petitioner's section 2254 petition be, and it hereby is, denied without prejudice inasmuch as he has failed to exhaust his state remedies.

As noted in the PF R, the magistrate judge construed petitioner's original filing, made under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, as in actuality seeking relief under section 2254. Inasmuch as that construction is entirely appropriate, it is adopted by the court.

The Clerk is directed to forward copies of this written opinion and order to the petitioner, all counsel of record, and the magistrate judge.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

THOMPSON v. STATE
(Apr 1, 2011)