Pugh v. Ellington

Filing 25

ORDER ADOPTING the 22 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS, as set out. Signed by District Judge William H. Steele on 7/13/2017. Copy mailed to Petitioner. (tgw)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION BRANDON MARQUIS PUGH, AIS# 00254312, Petitioner, v. JOSEPH HEADLEY, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 16-00402-WS-N ORDER After due and proper consideration of the issues raised, and a de novo determination of those portions of the recommendation to which objection is made, the Report and Recommendations of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. 22) made under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B)-(C), Rule 8(b) of the Rules Governing § 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts, and S.D. Ala. GenLR 72(a)(2)(R), and dated June 28, 2017, is ADOPTED as the opinion of this Court. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Petitioner’s Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction as to its challenge to the Petitioner’s 2007 conviction, and is DISMISSED with prejudice as to its challenge to the Petitioner’s 2012 probation revocation. It is further ORDERED that the Petitioner is not entitled to a Certificate of Appealability pursuant to this final adverse order. The Court also certifies that any appeal by the Petitioner of the dismissal of the present habeas petition would be without merit and therefore not taken in good faith. Thus, the Petitioner is not entitled to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. DONE and ORDERED this the 13th day of July, 2017. s/WILLIAM H. STEELE 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?