Burke v. Rathman et al
MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge L Scott Coogler on 1/9/2014. (MSN)
2014 Jan-09 PM 01:45
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
STEPHEN G. BURKE
JOHN T. RATHMAN, Warden; et al.,
Case No. 1:11-cv-1437-LSC-PWG
The magistrate judge filed a findings and recommendation on December 19, 2013 (Doc. #
15), recommending that the petition for writ of habeas corpus be DENIED and DISMISSED WITH
PREJUDICE. On January 6, 2013, petitioner, Stephen G. Burke (“Petitioner”), filed a pleading
styled as “Response to Findings and Recommendation.” (Doc. # 16). The court will treat such filing
as objections to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation or, in the alternative, as a motion.
Simply put, all of the objections raised by Petitioner were considered and rejected in the report and
recommendation, and are due to be OVERRULED.
Having carefully reviewed and considered de novo all the materials in the court file, the Court
is of the opinion that the magistrate judge’s findings are due to be and are hereby ADOPTED and
his recommendation is ACCEPTED. To the extent that the petitioner’s filing of January 6, 2013
(Doc. # 6), is construed as interposing objections to the report and recommendation, such objections
are due to be and hereby are OVERRULED. To the extent that the petitioner filing (Doc. # 6) is
construed as a motion, it is due to be and hereby is DENIED. Accordingly, the petition for writ of
habeas corpus is due to be DENIED and DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. A Final Judgment will
As to the foregoing it is SO ORDERED this the 9th day of January, 2014.
L. SCOTT COOGLER
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?