GORDON
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court adopted the magistrate judge's report and recommendation, dismissing the petition for writ of habeas corpus as moot.
Petitioner filed a pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus challenging his detention. The magistrate judge recommended dismissal as moot because the…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Clear Error Review cases and more on FLexlaw
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge (the “Report”) [ECF No. 5]. Petitioner filed a pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus, which the Court construes as a petition filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, challenging his continued detention at the Metro West Detention Center following a criminal conviction in the Eleventh Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-Dade County, Florida. [ECF No. 1]. The matter was referred to Magistrate Judge Reid for a ruling on all pre-trial non-dispositive matters and for a Report and Recommendation on any dispositive matters. [ECF No. 2]. Judge Reid’s Report recommends that the Court dismiss the petition as moot as Petitioner is no longer being held at the Metro West Detention Center.1 Petitioner has failed to timely object to the Report. A district court may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
Those portions of the report and recommendation to which objection is made are accorded de novo review, if those objections “pinpoint the specific findings that the
On May 29, 2020, Petitioner was arraigned in federal court and held in detention pending trial. Petitioner is currently in custody at the Miami Federal Detention Center. party disagrees with.” United States v. Schultz, 565 F. 3d 1353, 1360 (11th Cir. 2009); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). Any portions of the report and recommendation to which no specific objection is made are reviewed only for clear error. Liberty Am. Ins. Grp., Inc. v. WestPoint Underwriters, L.L.C., 199 F. Supp. 2d 1271, 1276 (M.D. Fla. 2001); accord Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 F. App’x 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006). The Court has reviewed the record and finds no clear error with Judge Reid’s well-reasoned analysis and conclusion that the Petition should be dismissed as moot.
Accordingly, after careful consideration, itis ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: (1) Judge Reid’s Report [ECF No. 5] is AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED and incorporated into this Order by reference; (2) Petitioner’s Petition for Habeas Corpus Relief [ECF No. 1] is DISMISSED as MOOT; (3) No certificate of appealability shall issue; and (4) This case shall be CLOSED. DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 19th day of October, 2020.
Df
DARRIN P. GAYLES
UNITED STATES DI. ICT JUDGE
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- United States v. Schultz, 565 F.3d 1353 (11th Cir. 2009)
- Liberty Am. Ins. Grp., Inc. v. Westpoint Underwriters, L.L.C., 2001 WL 1850837 (M.D. Fla. 2001)