Harris v. Forniss et al
MEMORANDUM OPINION Signed by Chief Judge Karon O Bowdre on 4/11/14. (SAC )
2014 Apr-11 AM 11:42
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
STEPHEN R. HARRIS,
LEON FORNISS, Warden, and
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
OF THE STATE OF ALABAMA,
Case No. 1:13-cv-01965-KOB-HGD
On November 21, 2013, the magistrate judge entered his report and
recommendation, recommending that the court dismiss the habeas petition as barred
by the statute of limitations. (Doc. 6). No party filed any objections, and the court
entered a Memorandum Opinion and Final Judgment on February 10, 2014. (Docs.
7 & 8).
On February 12, 2014, petitioner filed a motion for extension of time to file
objections to the report and recommendation. (Doc. 9). On March 4, 2014, the court
vacated the Memorandum Opinion and Final Judgment entered February 10 and
allowed petitioner until March 28, 2014, to file objections. (Doc. 10). Petitioner
sought and obtained a further extension to April 1, 2014 to file any objections. (Doc.
11 & Docket Entry dated March 25, 2014). Petitioner filed objections to the report
and recommendation on April 1, 2014. (Doc. 12). Those objections, however, do not
address the key issue: whether this petition is time-barred.
The court has carefully considered the entire record in this case de novo,
including the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation and petitioner’s
objections. The court ADOPTS the report of the magistrate judge and ACCEPTS his
recommendation to dismiss the habeas petition in this case as time-barred. The court
finds that the petitioner has failed to show that equitable tolling is warranted because
he has presented no extraordinary circumstances for his delay that were both beyond
his control and unavoidable even with diligence.
The court will enter a separate Order in conformity with this Memorandum
DONE and ORDERED this 11th day of April, 2014.
KARON OWEN BOWDRE
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Page 2 of 2
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?