Ankeney v. Jones
FINAL JUDGMENT by Clerk re: 33 Order on 9/27/12. (lygsl, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Case No. 12-cv-00808-LTB
SUSAN JONES, Warden of Fremont Correctional Facility,
TOM CLEMENTS, Director of the Colorado Department of Corrections ("CDOC"), and
JOHN SUTHERS, The Attorney General of the State of Colorado,
PURSUANT to and in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 58(a) and the Orders
entered throughout the course of proceedings in this case, the following final judgment
is hereby entered.
PURSUANT to and in accordance with the Order to Dismiss In Part entered by
the Honorable Lewis T. Babcock on July 17, 2012, and incorporated herein by reference
as if fully set forth, it is
ORDERED that claims 2, 4(a), and 4(b) are DISMISSED because those claims
do not present any issues that are cognizable in this habeas corpus action pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 2254.
PURSUANT to and in accordance with the Order on Application for Writ of
Habeas Corpus entered by the Honorable Lewis T. Babcock on September 25, 2012,
and incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth, it is
ORDERED that the Application for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 2254 and/or 28 U.S.C. § 2241 is DENIED. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that final judgment is hereby entered in favor of
Respondents, Susan Jones, Tom Clements, and John Suthers, and against Petitioner,
Randal Ankeney. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner’s Application for a Writ of Habeas Corpus
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 and/or 28 U.S.C. §2241 and this civil action are
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that there is no basis on which to issue a certificate of
appealability pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c).
DATED at Denver, Colorado this 27th day of September, 2012.
FOR THE COURT:
JEFFREY P. COLWELL, CLERK
s/ Edward P. Butler
Edward P. Butler,
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?