Delmond Cozart v. Oklahoma State Reformatory

W.D. Oklahoma

Delmond Cozart v. Oklahoma State Reformatory

DecidedMarch 23, 2026

Docket5:26-cv-00183

StatusUnknown

This text of Delmond Cozart v. Oklahoma State Reformatory (Delmond Cozart v. Oklahoma State Reformatory) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Oklahoma primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Delmond Cozart v. Oklahoma State Reformatory, (W.D. Okla. 2026).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

DELMOND COZART, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) Case No. CIV-26-183-J ) OKLAHOMA STATE REFORMATORY, ) ) Respondent. )

ORDER

Petitioner, a state inmate appearing pro se, filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 [Doc. No. 1] and an application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis [Doc. No. 2]. The matter was referred for initial proceedings to United States Magistrate Judge Suzanne Mitchell consistent with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), (C). On review, Judge Mitchell recommends that the Court deny Petitioner’s application on grounds that he has sufficient funds to pay the $5.00 filing fee. [Doc. No. 6]. Despite being cautioned that he must file any objection no later than March 2, 2026, Petitioner did not object and has waived his right to appellate review of the factual and legal issues addressed in the Report and Recommendation. See Casanova v. Ulibarri, 595 F.3d 1120, 1123 (10th Cir. 2010). Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 6] and DENIES Petitioner’s application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis [Doc. No. 2]. If Petitioner does not pay the $5.00 filing fee by April 13, 2026, the Court will dismiss his Petition without prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED this 234 day of March, 2026.

TR mm. 257 BERNARD M. JONES. II UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

DELMOND COZART, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) Case No. CIV-26-183-J ) OKLAHOMA STATE REFORMATORY, ) ) Respondent. )

ORDER

Petitioner, a state inmate appearing pro se, filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 [Doc. No. 1] and an application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis [Doc. No. 2]. The matter was referred for initial proceedings to United States Magistrate Judge Suzanne Mitchell consistent with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), (C). On review, Judge Mitchell recommends that the Court deny Petitioner’s application on grounds that he has sufficient funds to pay the $5.00 filing fee. [Doc. No. 6]. Despite being cautioned that he must file any objection no later than March 2, 2026, Petitioner did not object and has waived his right to appellate review of the factual and legal issues addressed in the Report and Recommendation. See Casanova v. Ulibarri, 595 F.3d 1120, 1123 (10th Cir. 2010). Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 6] and DENIES Petitioner’s application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis [Doc. No. 2]. If Petitioner does not pay the $5.00 filing fee by April 13, 2026, the Court will dismiss his Petition without prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED this 234 day of March, 2026.

TR mm. 257 BERNARD M. JONES. II UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Delmond Cozart v. Oklahoma State Reformatory, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/delmond-cozart-v-oklahoma-state-reformatory-okwd-2026.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack