Brown v. Barrett et al (INMATE 3)

Filing 3

ORDER that 2 petitioner's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED; that on or before August 2, 2011, the petitioner shall file with this court an amendment to his § 2254 petition as further set out in this order. Signed by Honorable Judge Wallace Capel, Jr on 7/12/2011. (jg, )

Download PDF
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHERN DIVISION LADARIUS LEWIS BROWN, #258290, Petitioner, v. BOBBY BARRETT, et al., Respondents. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil Action No. 2:11cv537-ID (WO) ORDER The petitioner’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. No. 2) is GRANTED. The petitioner, an Alabama inmate housed at the Kilby Correctional Facility, has filed the above-captioned action for habeas corpus relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On the second page of his petition (Doc. No. 1), the petitioner indicates that he is challenging a pending detainer in the Circuit Court of Elmore County, Alabama. However, the petitioner does not provide any other information about the judgment he is challenging. Nor does the petitioner set forth any grounds on which he challenges the judgment. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that on or before August 2, 2011, the petitioner shall file with this court an amendment to his § 2254 petition that clearly states (1) the judgment the petitioner is challenging, including the date of the judgment and the court that entered the judgment, and (2) clearly states each ground on which the petitioner challenges the judgment and sets forth specific facts supporting each ground. The petitioner is cautioned that his failure to comply with this Order will result in a recommendation by the undersigned that this case be dismissed. Done this 12th day of July, 2011. /s/Wallace Capel, Jr. WALLACE CAPEL, JR. UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 2

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?