Alverson v. Ellington et al
MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge L Scott Coogler on 6/19/2017. (PSM)
2017 Jun-19 AM 11:53
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
RODNEY DALE ALVERSON,
WARDEN EDWARD ELLINGTON and
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE
STATE OF ALABAMA,
This is a habeas corpus case filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 by Petitioner
Rodney Dale Alverson, an Alabama state prisoner acting pro se. (Doc.1 1-1
(“Petition” or “Pet.”)). Alverson challenges his life sentence and concurrent lesser
sentences imposed by the Circuit Court of Jefferson County, Alabama, in 2008. (Pet.
at 1). The magistrate judge to whom the action was referred entered a Report and
Recommendation (“R&R”), see 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), proposing that Alverson’s
habeas petition be dismissed without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction, as successive
References to “Doc(s)___” are to the documents number of the pleadings, motions, and
other materials in the court file, as compiled and designated on the docket sheet by the Clerk of
the Court. Unless otherwise noted, pinpoint citations are to the page of the electronically filed
document in the court’s CM/ECF system, which may not correspond to pagination on the
original “hard copy” presented for filing.
under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b). (Doc. 3). No objections to the R&R were filed, and the
time in which to do so has expired.
Having carefully reviewed and considered de novo all the materials in the court
file, including the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation, 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. As a result, the petition for writ of habeas
corpus is due to be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, lack of jurisdiction. A
separate final order will be entered.
Done this 19th day of June 2017.
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?