ALVAREZ v. HASTINGS, CV214-070. (2014)
Court: District Court, S.D. Georgia
Number: infdco20141028d94
Visitors: 19
Filed: Oct. 21, 2014
Latest Update: Oct. 21, 2014
Summary: ORDER LISA GODBEY WOOD, Chief District Judge. After an independent and de novo review of the entire record, the undersigned concurs with the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, to which Petitioner Carlos Alvarez ("Alvarez") filed Objections. In his Objections, Alvarez contends that the Magistrate Judge's conclusion that Burrraqe v. United States , ___ U.S. ____, 134 S.Ct. 888 (Jan. 27, 2014), is not retroactively applicable to cases on collateral review is contrary to Fiore v. W
Summary: ORDER LISA GODBEY WOOD, Chief District Judge. After an independent and de novo review of the entire record, the undersigned concurs with the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, to which Petitioner Carlos Alvarez ("Alvarez") filed Objections. In his Objections, Alvarez contends that the Magistrate Judge's conclusion that Burrraqe v. United States , ___ U.S. ____, 134 S.Ct. 888 (Jan. 27, 2014), is not retroactively applicable to cases on collateral review is contrary to Fiore v. Wh..
More
ORDER
LISA GODBEY WOOD, Chief District Judge.
After an independent and de novo review of the entire record, the undersigned concurs with the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, to which Petitioner Carlos Alvarez ("Alvarez") filed Objections. In his Objections, Alvarez contends that the Magistrate Judge's conclusion that Burrraqe v. United States, ___ U.S. ____, 134 S.Ct. 888 (Jan. 27, 2014), is not retroactively applicable to cases on collateral review is contrary to Fiore v. White, 531 U.S. 225 (2001). In Fiore, the United States Supreme Court determined that a state cannot convict a person, consistent with the due process clause, for conduct that its criminal statute, as properly interpreted, does not prohibit. 531 U.S. at 228. Alvarez was not convicted of an act which is not prohibited by statute, and Fiore is inapplicable.
Alvarez's Objections are overruled. The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation is adopted as the opinion of the Court. Respondent's Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED. Alvarez's petition for writ of habeas corpus, filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, is DISMISSED. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter the appropriate judgment of dismissal.
SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
