United States District Court, N.D. West Virginia
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER AFFIRMING AND ADOPTING
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE
FREDERICK P. STAMP, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
pro se petitioner, Darin Fields, is serving a
sentence imposed by the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of Louisiana. ECF No. 1 at 1-2. The
petitioner filed a Petition for Habeas Corpus Under 28 U.S.C.
§ 2241, in which he alleges that Mathis v. United
States, 136 S.Ct. 2243, 195 L.Ed.2d 604 (2016), among
other cases, establishes that petitioner is no longer
considered a career offender. ECF No. 1-1 at 1. The
petitioner requests that "his sentence [ ] be vacated,
and adjusted to the proper guideline term." Id.
civil action was referred to United States Magistrate Judge
Michael John Aloi under Local Rule of Prisoner Litigation
Procedure 2. Magistrate Judge Aloi issued a report and
recommendation (ECF No. 10) recommending that the
petitioner's petition (ECF No. 1) be denied and dismissed
without prejudice. The petitioner did not file objections to
the report and recommendation. For the following reasons,
this Court affirms and adopts the report and recommendation
in its entirety.
to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court must conduct a
de novo review of any portion of the magistrate
judge's recommendation to which objection is timely made.
As to findings where no objections were made, such findings
and recommendations will be upheld unless they are
“clearly erroneous or contrary to law.” 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(b)(1)(A). Because the petitioner did not file any
objections to the report and recommendation, the magistrate
judge's findings and recommendations will be upheld
unless they are “clearly erroneous or contrary to
law.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A).
report and recommendation, the magistrate judge correctly
noted that the petitioner has not sought relief under any
permissible ground in his petition. Id. at 8.
Specifically, petitioner's claims "do not relate to
the execution or calculation of sentence by the BOP. Instead,
the claims relate to the validity of the [p]etitioner's
sentence imposed in the Eastern District of Louisiana."
Id. The magistrate judge also properly noted that
since petitioner is not challenging his conviction, the test
under In re Jones, 226 F.3d 328 (4th Cir. 2000), is
inapplicable. Id. The magistrate judge then
proceeded to analyze the petitioner's claim under the
four-part test established in United States v.
Wheeler, 886 F.3d 415 (4th Cir. 2018). Id. at
9. The magistrate judge correctly found that
"[p]etitioner cannot meet the second element of the
Wheeler test "because any change to the settled
law which established the legality of [p]etitioner's
sentence has not been deemed to apply retroactively to cases
on collateral review." Id. Specifically, the
magistrate judge properly noted that neither Mathis
nor Descamps apply retroactively in the Fourth
Circuit. Id. The magistrate judge thus recommended
that the petitioner's petition (ECF No. 1) be denied and
dismissed without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction.
Id. at 10.
review, this Court finds no clear error in the determinations
of the magistrate judge and thus upholds his recommendation.
reasons set forth above, the report and recommendation of the
magistrate judge (ECF No. 10) is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED in its
entirety. Accordingly, the petition for writ of habeas corpus
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (ECF No. 1) is DENIED and
DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
Court finds that the petitioner was properly advised by the
magistrate judge that failure to timely object to the report
and recommendation in this action would result in a waiver of
appellate rights. Because the petitioner has failed to
object, he has waived his right to seek appellate review of
this matter. See Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841,
844-45 (4th Cir. 1985).
ORDERED that this civil action be DISMISSED and STRICKEN from