Polson v. State of Alabama et al (INMATE 2)
ORDER as follows: 1. Petitioner's 35 Objections are overruled. 2. The court adopts the 32 Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. 3. This case is Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Signed by Honorable Judge W. Harold Albritton, III on 9/29/2016. (dmn, )
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
STATE OF ALABAMA, SCOTT
HASSELL, LUTHER STRANGE, &
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:13cv366-WHA
This case is before the court on the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. #
32), entered on September 8, 2016, and the Respondents’ Objections (Doc. # 35), filed on
September 27, 2016. The court has conducted an independent evaluation and de novo review of
the file and finds the Objections to be without merit.
The Magistrate Judge recommended that this petition for habeas corpus be dismissed for
want of jurisdiction because the Petitioner was not “in custody” on the state court conviction he
challenges at the time he filed the petition. The Petitioner contends that he was, in fact, in
custody at the time because of an order for him to appear regarding restitution. The court agrees
with the Magistrate Judge, for the reasons explained in his Recommendation, that restraint does
not amount to the Petitioner being “in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court.”
Therefore, it is hereby Ordered as follows:
1. Petitioner’s objections are Overruled.
2. The court adopts the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge.
3. This case is Dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
Done this 29th day of September, 2016.
/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?