Davis v. Lee ( 2022 )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA LARRY DAVIS CIVIL ACTION VERSUS NO. 22-173 HARRY LEE, ET AL. SECTION D (1) ORDER AND REASONS The Court, having considered de novo the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus,! the record, the applicable law, the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge,” and the failure of the Plaintiff to file any objection to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation,* hereby approves the Report and Recommendation and adopts it as its opinion in this matter. In doing so, the Court notes that it has construed Plaintiff Larry Davis’s pro se pleadings liberally.4 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's 28 U.S.C. § 22545 claims alleged in the Complaint® are DISMISSED for the reasons stated in the Report and Recommendation and Plaintiffs claims against Harry Lee and Joseph Lopinto are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. New Orleans, Louisiana, May 31, 2022. WENDY sateen United States District Judge Doc. 6. 2R. Doce. 14. 3 Objections were due May 9, 2022. Because Plaintiff is proceeding pro se, the Court has allowed additional time for objections. None have been filed as of the date of this Order. 4 See Coleman v. United States, 912 F.3d 824, 828 (5th Cir. 2019). The Court notes that Plaintiff has filed two § 1983 complaints and an additional habeas petition within the past six months. See 21-cv- 2270, 22-cv-172, and 22-cv-754. 5 Although filed as a 28 U.S.C. § 2254 claim, the Court notes that Davis’s application must be construed as one seeking relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 because he is still a pretrial detainee awaiting trial. The Report and Recommendation noted this distinction. See R. Doc. 14. Doc. 6.