Ward v. Barrette et al

Filing 7

MEMORANDUM OPINION Signed by Judge William M Acker, Jr on 12/18/15. (SAC )

FILED
2015 Dec-18 PM 02:58
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
JASPER DIVISION
NORMA JEAN WARD,
Petitioner,
v.
BOBBY BARRETTE, Warden,
and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
OF THE STATE OF ALABAMA,
Respondents.

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

6:15-cv-1544-WMA-JEO

MEMORANDUM OPINION
This is an action on a petition for a writ of habeas
corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 by Norma Jean Ward,
an Alabama state prisoner acting pro se. (Doc. 1). On November
10, 2015, the magistrate judge to whom the case was referred
for preliminary review entered a report and recommendation
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), recommending that the petition
be denied both because Ward’s claims are barred by the statute
of limitations and because those claims are unexhausted and
now procedurally defaulted. (Doc. 6). The magistrate judge
advised Ward of her right to file objections to the report and
recommendation, but no objections have been filed, and the
time in which to do so has now 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. Accordingly, the
petition for a writ of habeas corpus is due to be DENIED and
this action is due to be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Further,
the court concludes that the petition does not present issues
that are debatable among jurists of reason, so a certificate
of appealability is also due to be DENIED. See 28 U.S.C. §
2253(c); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484-85 (2000); Rule
11(a), Rules Governing § 2254 Proceedings. A separate Final
Order will be entered.
DONE this 18th day of December, 2015.

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

2