Ellison v. Hodge

Filing 9

ORDER DISMISSING CASE: IT IS ORDERED that the petition (Doc. 1 ) is DISMISSED without prejudice. The pending motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 2 ) shall be DENIED AS MOOT. Signed by Chief Judge David R. Herndon on 3/4/2014. (tjk)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS BENNIE K. ELLISON, No. R00575, Petitioner, vs. MARC HODGE, Respondent. Case No. 13-cv-01186-DRH MEMORANDUM AND ORDER HERNDON, Chief Judge: Introduction and Background Petitioner Bennie K. Ellison is in the custody of the Illinois Department of Corrections. Ellison filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, attacking his state conviction(s) and seeking exoneration and immediate release from prison (Doc. 1). After a preliminary review of the petition pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in United States District Courts, the petition was dismissed without prejudice and with leave to amend by February 21, 2014 (Doc. 7). The Court noted that, in addition to the petition mirroring Ellison’s pending civil rights action, it appeared that he had not exhausted state remedies before filing his petition. Accordingly, petitioner was warned that failure to file an amended petition would result in the dismissal of this action without prejudice. Ellison has elected not to file an amended petition. Page 1 of 2 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the petition (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED without prejudice. Judgment shall enter accordingly and this action will be closed. The pending motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 2) shall be DENIED AS MOOT. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed this 4th day of March, 2014. Digitally signed by David R. Herndon Date: 2014.03.04 16:38:33 -06'00' Chief Judge United States District Court Page 2 of 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?