Morris v. Coram et al (INMATE 2)

Filing 14

ORDER (1) ADOPTING 4 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION of the Mag Judge; (2) the claims arising from the conduct and/or actions of defs which occurred on or before 10/6/06 and/or 10/31/06 be DISMISSED with prejudice prior to service of process pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(A)(b)(1) as the complaint is not filed within the time prescribed by the applicable period of limitations; (3) to the extent plf's complaint challenges the constitutionality of his convictions and/or sente nces entered against him by this court in Criminal Number 2:05-CR-108-LSC and/or 2:06-CR-218-MHT, these claims be DISMISSED in accordance with the directives of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(A)(b)(1); and (4) This case be DISMISSED prior to service of process pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(A)(b)(1). Signed by Honorable Truman M. Hobbs on 3/4/10. (djy, )

THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES F O R THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA N O R T H E R N DIVISION G E O R G E HOEY MORRIS, #11672-002, Plaintiff, v. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

2:09-CV-1085-TMH [W O ]

T H O M A S CORAM, JR., et al., Defendants.

ORDER
O n December 10, 2009, the Magistrate Judge filed a Recommendation (Doc. 4) in this c a s e . Objections to the Recommendation were originally due on December 28, 2009, and P la in tif f received an extension to file objections through January 29, 2010. (Doc. 10.) On F e b ru a ry 2, 1010, Plaintiff filed a Notice to the Court (Doc. 11), which was construed by the C o u rt as an objection. However, the Notice/objection does not provide any grounds or re a so n s for his objection. Therefore, the purported objection is without merit. U p o n an independent review of the file in this case and upon consideration of the R e c o m m e n d a tio n of the Magistrate Judge, it is ORDERED that: 1. 2. T h e Recommendation (Doc. 4) of the Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED, and T h e claims arising from the conduct and/or actions of Defendants which o c c u rre d on or before October 6, 2006 and/or October 31, 2006 be D IS M IS S E D with prejudice prior to service of process pursuant to the p ro v is io n s of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(A)(b)(1) as the complaint is not filed within

th e time prescribed by the applicable period of limitations: 3. T o the extent Plaintiff's complaint challenges the constitutionality of his c o n v ic tio n s and/or sentences entered against him by this court in Criminal N u m b e r 2:05-CR-108-LSC (M.D. Ala.) and/or 2:06-CR-218-MHT (M.D. A la ), these claims be DISMISSED in accordance with the directives of 28 U .S .C . § 1915(A)(b)(1); and 4. T h is case be DISMISSED prior to service of process pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1 9 1 5 (A )(b)(1). An appropriate judgment will be entered. D o n e this 4th day of March, 2010.

/s / Truman M. Hobbs S E N IO R UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2