Noe v. Daniels et al (INMATE 3)
OPINION. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 12/31/2014. (wcl, )
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION
LEEPOSEY DANIELS, LUTHER
STRANGE, and ALABAMA BOARD
OF PARDONS AND PAROLES,
CIVIL ACTION NO.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, petitioner, a state
inmate, filed this lawsuit seeking habeas relief.
lawsuit is now before the court on the recommendation
of the United States Magistrate Judge that petitioner’s
petitioner’s objections to the recommendation.
an independent and de novo review of the record, the
court concludes that the petitioner’s objections should
be overruled and the magistrate judge’s recommendation
Admittedly, the magistrate judge cites authority on
parole revocations, rather than parole denials, even
though the petitioner here contests his parole denial.
However, under Alabama law, the appeal procedure for
both revocations and denials is the same.
the recommendation that petitioner must first exhaust
his state remedies by seeking a writ of certiorari in
state circuit court is correct, and does not change.
See Baker v. State, 651 So. 2d 72, 73 (Ala. Crim. App.
1994) (“A petition for a writ of certiorari filed in
appropriate remedy for review of the actions of the
Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles in reference to
(internal citations omitted).
An appropriate judgment will be entered.
DONE, this the 31st day of December, 2014.
/s/ Myron H. Thompson
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?