Langley v. Goldey

W.D. Oklahoma

Langley v. Goldey

DecidedJanuary 4, 2024

Docket5:23-cv-00461

StatusUnknown

This text of Langley v. Goldey (Langley v. Goldey) 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

Langley v. Goldey, (W.D. Okla. 2024).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

JEREMY LANGLEY, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) Case No. CIV-23-461-SLP ) WARDEN GOLDEY, ) ) Respondent. )

O R D E R

Petitioner, a federal prisoner appearing pro se, filed a Petition [Doc. No. 1] seeking a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. On November 8, 2023, United States Magistrate Judge Suzanne Mitchell entered a Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 14] (R.&R.) recommending the Petition be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Petitioner was advised that he could object to the R.&R. on or before November 29, 2023, and that failure to timely object could result in the waiver of his right to appellate review of the factual and legal issues raised. To date, no objection to the R. & R. has been filed nor has an extension of time in which to object been sought or granted. Upon review, the Court concurs with the analysis set forth in the R.&.R. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the R.& R. [Doc. No. 14] is ADOPTED in its entirety and the Petition [Doc. No. 1] is DISMISSED.1

1 Because Petitioner is a federal prisoner, he does not need a certificate of appealability (COA) to appeal the denial of his § 2241 petition. See Eldridge v. Berkebile, 791 F.3d 1239, 1241 (10th Cir. 2015). Therefore, the Court need not consider whether to issue a COA in this case. IT IS SO ORDERED this 4" day of January, 2024.

SCOTT L. PALK UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

JEREMY LANGLEY, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) Case No. CIV-23-461-SLP ) WARDEN GOLDEY, ) ) Respondent. )

O R D E R

Petitioner, a federal prisoner appearing pro se, filed a Petition [Doc. No. 1] seeking a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. On November 8, 2023, United States Magistrate Judge Suzanne Mitchell entered a Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 14] (R.&R.) recommending the Petition be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Petitioner was advised that he could object to the R.&R. on or before November 29, 2023, and that failure to timely object could result in the waiver of his right to appellate review of the factual and legal issues raised. To date, no objection to the R. & R. has been filed nor has an extension of time in which to object been sought or granted. Upon review, the Court concurs with the analysis set forth in the R.&.R. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the R.& R. [Doc. No. 14] is ADOPTED in its entirety and the Petition [Doc. No. 1] is DISMISSED.1

1 Because Petitioner is a federal prisoner, he does not need a certificate of appealability (COA) to appeal the denial of his § 2241 petition. See Eldridge v. Berkebile, 791 F.3d 1239, 1241 (10th Cir. 2015). Therefore, the Court need not consider whether to issue a COA in this case. IT IS SO ORDERED this 4" day of January, 2024.

SCOTT L. PALK UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Langley v. Goldey, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/langley-v-goldey-okwd-2024.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack