Stewart v. Patterson et al (INMATE 3)
Filing
57
OPINION AND ORDER directing that, upon an independent review of the file in this case and upon consideration of the 56 Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge be and is here by ADOPTED, that the petition for habeas corpus relief be and is hereby DENIED, and that this case be and is hereby DISMISSED because Stewart has failed to demonstrate that the disciplinary action resulting in his placement in disciplinary segregation and loss of privileges gives rise to any claim for federal habeas relief or states any claim for a denial of his constitutional right to due process. Signed by Honorable Judge W. Harold Albritton, III on 4/28/14. (scn, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN DIVISION
MICHAEL C. STEWART, #174305,
Petitioner,
v.
TONY PATTERSON, et al.,
Respondents.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:11cv1009-TMH
(WO)
OPINION and ORDER
On February 26, 2014, the Magistrate Judge filed a Recommendation in this case
recommending that the petition of habeas corpus relief filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 be
dismissed. (Doc. # 56). Upon an independent review of the file in this case and upon
consideration of the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, it is
ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge be
and is hereby ADOPTED, that the petition for habeas corpus relief be and is hereby
DENIED, and that this case be and is hereby DISMISSED because Stewart has failed to
demonstrate that the disciplinary action resulting in his placement in disciplinary segregation
and loss of privileges gives rise to any claim for federal habeas relief or states any claim for
a denial of his constitutional right to due process.
Done this 28th day of April, 2014.
/s/ W. Harold Albritton
SENIOR 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?