Wolff v. USA et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
Charles Jay Wolff
v.
USA, et al.
Case No. 20-cv-956-LM
O R D E R
Magistrate Judge Andrea K. Johnstone issued a Report and Recommendation
in this action on May 19, 2021 (doc. no. 13), recommending that the habeas corpus
petition (doc. no. 1) as supplemented by petitioner’s addendum (doc. no. 12) be
denied and petitioner’s claims dismissed without prejudice. On May 26, 2021,
petitioner filed a document styled as a “motion to retract” this case (doc. no. 14) and
demanding return of petitioner’s filing fee (although the court’s record does not
reflect that petitioner ever paid any filing fee in this action). On May 27, 2021,
petitioner submitted a document styled as a “motion in question” to the United
States District Court for the District of Massachusetts (the court in which petitioner
initially filed his habeas corpus petition and the transferor court in this action); that
document was docketed in this case as doc. no. 15.
Although the caption of the document filed May 26, 2021, suggests that
petitioner intends to withdraw his habeas corpus petition voluntarily, the text of the
document does not lend support to that interpretation. Because the court does not
find that petitioner clearly expresses his intention to withdraw his habeas corpus
petition, the court declines to deem petitioner’s petition voluntarily withdrawn.
Case 1:20-cv-00956-LM Document 16 Filed 07/14/21 Page 1 of 2

Although the document filed May 27, 2021, contains few, if any, indications
that petitioner intended it to serve as a statement of objections to Judge Johnstone’s
Report and Recommendation, in the interest of ensuring that petitioner has a full
opportunity to be heard, the court construes it as such. After due consideration of
that document, the court herewith approves the Report and Recommendation of
Magistrate Judge Andrea K. Johnstone dated May 19, 2021.
Additionally, finding that the petitioner has failed to make a substantial
showing of the denial of a constitutional right, the court declines to issue a
certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C.§ 2253(c)(2); Rule 11, Rules Governing
Habeas Corpus Cases Under Section 2254; First Cir. LR 22.0. All pending motions
(including doc. nos. 14 and 15) are denied as moot.
____________________________
Landya B. McCafferty
Chief Judge
Date: July 14, 2021
cc: Charles Jay Wolff, pro se
Case 1:20-cv-00956-LM Document 16 Filed 07/14/21 Page 2 of 2