Neal v. Hobbs

Filing 17

ORDER ADOPTING 15 Report and Recommendations granting Defendants 11 Motion to Dismiss. Signed by Judge Susan Webber Wright on 6/22/2012. (pag)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS PINE BLUFF DIVISION WOODROW NEAL, JR. v. PETITIONER NO. 5:11CV00331 SWW RAY HOBBS, Director of the Arkansas Department of Correction RESPONDENT ORDER The Court has received findings and a recommendation from Magistrate Judge H. David Young. No objections have been filed. After a careful, de novo review of the record, the Court concludes that the findings and recommendation should be, and hereby are, approved and adopted in their entirety as this Court’s findings in all respects. The motion to dismiss filed by respondent Ray Hobbs (“Hobbs”) is granted, see Document 11, and the petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254 filed by petitioner Woodrow Neal, Jr., (“Neal”) is dismissed. All requested relief is denied, and, in accordance with Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases In The United States District Courts, a certificate of appealability is denied. Judgment will be entered for Hobbs. Neal is cautioned regarding the following matter: the petition at bar marks his fourth challenge to some aspect of his conviction and/or sentence in CR-1997-202. In his three most recent petitions, he offered no reason for attacking the conviction and/or sentence nor did he obtain the approval of the Court of Appeals before filing the petitions. Neal is cautioned that his continued filing of petitions devoid of a reason for challenging his conviction and/or sentence in CR-1997-202, and filing petitions challenging that conviction and/or sentence without the approval of the Court of Appeals, will result in sanctions. IT IS SO ORDERED this 22nd day of June, 2012. /s/Susan Webber Wright UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE -2-

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?