Morgan v. Hobbs

Filing 8

ORDER adopting 7 Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition in their entirety as this Court's findings in all respects. 5 Motion to hold in abeyance is granted in part and denied in part. Petitioner's request to dismiss this 28 U.S.C . § 2254 petition for a writ of habeas corpus is granted, and this action is dismissed without prejudice, so that petitioner may seek authorization from the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A), to file a s uccessive habeas petition; Petitioner's request to hold this action in abeyance, while he seeks Eighth Circuit authorization, is denied; and a certificate of appealability is denied pursuant to Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in United States District Courts. Signed by Judge J. Leon Holmes on 3/31/2014. (ks)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
PINE BLUFF DIVISION
JOE MORGAN
ADC #94725
v.

PETITIONER

NO. 5:14CV00017 JLH-JTR

RAY HOBBS, Director,
Arkansas Department of Correction

RESPONDENT
ORDER

The Court has reviewed the Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition submitted
by United States Magistrate Judge J. Thomas Ray. No objections have been filed. After careful
consideration, the Court concludes that the Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition
should be, and hereby are, approved and adopted in their entirety as this Court’s findings in all
respects. Judgment will be entered accordingly.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT:
1.

Petitioner’s motion to hold in abeyance or for dismissal without prejudice is

GRANTED in part and DENIED in part (Document #5);
2.

Petitioner’s request to dismiss this 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for a writ of habeas

corpus is GRANTED, and this action is DISMISSED, WITHOUT PREJUDICE, so that petitioner
may seek authorization from the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 2244(b)(3)(A), to file a successive habeas petition;
3.

Petitioner’s request to hold this action in abeyance, while he seeks Eighth Circuit

authorization, is DENIED; and
4.

A certificate of appealability is DENIED pursuant to Rule 11(a) of the Rules

Governing Section 2254 Cases in United States District Courts.

DATED this 31st day of March, 2014.

__________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE