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

YVENEL MATHIEU, Petitioner, v. JOSE M. VAZQUEZ, Respondent.

ORDER

ANTHONY ALAIMO, District Judge

After an independent review of the record, the Court concurs with the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, to which Objections have been filed. In his Objections, Mathieu asserts the Magistrate Judge failed to distinguish the facts of his case from those underlying the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals' decision in Wofford v. Scott, 177 F.3d 1236 (11th Cir. 1999). Mathieu contends this failure renders the Report erroneous. Mathieu alleges he has shown that the remedy afforded by 28 U.S.C. § 2255 is ineffective or inadequate because Congress "made no provision where one can attack an illegal sentence where as here the Supreme Court has declared that the Sentencing Scheme under which Petitioner's sentence was imposed is thus invalid and renders any sentence imposed under said scheme illegal an illegal sentence." (Doc. No. 10, p. 8.) Mathieu also alleges this Court's failure to address the merits of his claims is nothing more than a miscarriage of justice.

Mathieu's Objections are without merit. The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is adopted as the opinion of the Court. Mathieu's petition for writ of habeas corpus, filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, is DISMISSED. The Clerk of Court is hereby authorized and directed to enter an appropriate Judgment of Dismissal.

SO ORDERED.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

MATHIEU v. VAZQUEZ
(May 1, 2007)