Minnifield v. Holt et al (INMATE1)
ORDER directing as follows: 1) Mr. Minnifield's 60 Objection is OVERRULED; 2) The 59 Recommendation is ADOPTED; 3) The 28 USC 2254 petition for habeas corpus relief filed by Mr. Minnifield on 1/24/2006, is DENIED as Mr. Minnifield failed to file this petition within the one-year period of limitation set forth in 28 USC 2244(d)(1); 4) This action is DISMISSED with prejudice; An appropriate judgment will be entered. Signed by Honorable William Keith Watkins on 2/23/2009. (wcl, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT F O R THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHERN DIVISION JO H N WILLIE MINNIFIELD, #112145, P e t i t io n e r , v. ARNOLD HOLT, et al., R e s p o n d e n ts . ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
CASE NO. 2:06-CV-54-WKW[WO]
OR DER O n January 27, 2009, the Magistrate Judge filed a Recommendation in this case. (D o c . # 59.) Petitioner John Willie Minnifield ("Mr. Minnifield") filed an objection on F e b ru a ry 17, 2009. (Doc. # 60.) Having independently reviewed the file in this case and c o n d u c te d a de novo review of those portions of the Recommendation to which objection is m a d e , see 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the court finds that the objection lacks merit for s u b s ta n tia lly the same reasons set forth in the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation and that th e objection does not warrant further discussion. Accordingly, it is ORDERED as follows: 1. 2. 3. M r. Minnifield's objection (Doc. # 60) is OVERRULED. T h e Recommendation (Doc. # 59) is ADOPTED. T h e 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for habeas corpus relief filed by Mr. Minnifield
o n January 4, 2006, is DENIED as Mr. Minnifield failed to file this petition within the oneyea r period of limitation set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1). 4. T h is action is DISMISSED with prejudice.
A n appropriate judgment will be entered. D O N E this 23rd day of February, 2009. /s/ W. Keith Watkins UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?