Williams v. Giles

Filing 19

ORDER-re: R&R 10 The court hereby ADOPTS the Report of the Magistrate Judge and ACCEPTS his Recommendations. It is hereby ORDERED that petitioner's request for habeas corpus relief based on Claims (3) through (13)is DENIED. With respect to P etitioners Claims (1), (2), and (14), the court will conduct an evidentiary hearing to determine the viability of Petitioners argument that trial counsel failed to call Petitioner as a witness in his own defense despite Petitioners stated desire to testify. This case is REFERRED back to the Magistrate Judge to conduct a hearing in accordance with the Report and Recommendation. Signed by Judge R David Proctor on 8/8/2012. (AVC)

FILED
2012 Aug-08 PM 02:42
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
SOUTHERN DIVISION
CARLOS R. WILLIAMS,
Petitioner,
v.
J.C. GILES, WARDEN, and
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF
THE STATE OF ALABAMA,

Respondents.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 2:10-CV-1069-RDP-HGD

ORDER
On July 21, 2011, the Magistrate Judge entered a Report and Recommendation (Doc. # 10),
recommending that habeas corpus relief be denied with respect to Petitioner’s claims (3) through
(13), and that the court conduct an evidentiary hearing pursuant to Rule 7 of the Rules Governing
Habeas Corpus Cases under Section 2254 to determine the viability of Petitioner’s claims (1), (2),
and (14). Respondents filed objections on August 4, 2011, contending that habeas corpus relief
should have been denied with respect to Petitioner’s claims (1) and (2). (Doc. # 13). Petitioner has
not filed any objections.
After careful consideration of the record in this case and the Magistrate Judge’s Report and
Recommendation (Doc. # 10), the court hereby ADOPTS the Report of the Magistrate Judge and
ACCEPTS his Recommendations.
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED as follows:
1.
DENIED.

Petitioner’s request for habeas corpus relief based on Claims (3) through (13) is

2.

With respect to Petitioner’s Claims (1), (2), and (14), the court will conduct an

evidentiary hearing to determine the viability of Petitioner’s argument that trial counsel failed to call
Petitioner as a witness in his own defense despite Petitioner’s stated desire to testify.
This case is REFERRED back to the Magistrate Judge to conduct a hearing in accordance
with the Report and Recommendation.
The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to send a copy of this order to Petitioner.
DONE and ORDERED this

8th

day of August, 2012.

___________________________________
R. DAVID PROCTOR
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2