Noe v. Boyd et al (INMATE 1)
ORDER that the 12 Objection is OVERRULED, the court ADOPTS the 11 Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, and it is hereby ORDERED that this case is TRANSFERRED to the USDC ALND pursuant to the provisions of 28 USC § 2241(d); DIRECTING the clerk to take appropriate steps to effect the transfer. Signed by Honorable Judge W. Harold Albritton, III on 6/19/2012. (wcl, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
WOODBURCK NOE, #148475,
LOUIS BOYD, et al.,
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:12cv254-WHA
This case is before the court on the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. #11),
entered on May 23, 2012, and Petitioner’s Objection thereto (Doc. #12).
The court has conducted an independent evaluation and de novo review of the file in this
case, and having done so, the court finds that the objection is without merit and is due to be
The Magistrate Judge recommended that this case be transferred to the United States
District Court for the Northern District of Alabama, that being the district in which the Petitioner
was convicted in a state court of murder. Although Noe’s incarceration at a prison facility
within this court’s jurisdiction provides concurrent jurisdiction over this case with the United
States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama, the court agrees with the Magistrate
Judge’s conclusion that this case should be transferred. Accordingly, the objection is
OVERRULED, the court ADOPTS the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, and it is
ORDERED that this case is TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Alabama pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d).
The clerk is DIRECTED to take appropriate steps to effect the transfer.
DONE this 19th day of June, 2012.
/s/ W. Harold Albritton
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?