Means v. State of Alabama

Filing 18

MEMORANDUM OPINION Signed by Judge William M Acker, Jr on 6/18/14. (SAC )

FILED
2014 Jun-18 PM 02:09
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
MIDDLE DIVISION

SCHEAREAN JEAN MEANS,
Petitioner,
vs.
STATE OF ALABAMA,
Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 4:12-cv-04049-WMA-TMP

MEMORANDUM OPINION
The magistrate judge filed his Report and Recommendation (doc. 16) in the abovestyled cause on May 29, 2014, recommending that the § 2254 petition for writ of habeas
corpus challenging the constitutional validity of Petitioner’s conviction be dismissed without
prejudice because the court is without jurisdiction to adjudicate Petitioner’s claims.
Schearean Jean Means (“Petitioner”) filed no objections to the Report and Recommendation.
Instead, on June 8, 2014, Petitioner filed a motion requesting a copy of the Respondent’s
Answer.1 (Doc. 17).

1

Petitioner’s motion (doc. 17) refers to the Respondent’s Answer “filed in and by the Court on
October 7, 2013.” The Respondent’s answer was filed on September 24, 2013, (doc. 10) and the court’s
Order Regarding Summary Disposition was filed on October 7, 2013. (Doc. 11). Although it is difficult
for the court to discern which document the Petitioner is requesting, it appears from the docket summary
that she received both documents. Petitioner was able to respond to the Answer, at the behest of the
court’s Order Regarding Summary Disposition, on November 11, 2013 - following a Motion for
Extension of Time, which the court granted. Without having seen both documents, it is unlikely that
Petitioner would have been able to respond to the Answer, or would have known to ask for an extension
of time in which to file her response. Accordingly, Petitioner’s motion (doc. 17) is due to be and hereby
is DENIED and DISMISSED. The Clerk is DIRECTED to terminate the motion.

Having now carefully reviewed and considered de novo all materials in the court file
relevant to the case, the court finds that the report is due to be ADOPTED and the
recommendation ACCEPTED. A corresponding order shall be entered contemporaneously
herewith.

DONE and ORDERED this 18th day of June, 2014.

_____________________________
WILLIAM M. ACKER, JR.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2