CARTER v. WARDEN, F.C.I. TERRE HAUTE IN.
ORDER denying 10 Petitioner's Motion for Reconsideration - The petitioner's motion to reconsider 10 is treated as a motion to alter or amend judgment and as so understood is denied. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 5/14/2012. (copy to Petitioner via US Mail) (JKS)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
WARDEN, FCI TERRE HAUTE, IN,
The petitioner’s motion to reconsider  is treated as a motion to alter or
amend judgment and as so understood is denied. The reason for this ruling is that
the petition for a writ of habeas corpus was properly dismissed for the reasons
explained in the Entry of April 6, 2012. Harrington v. City of Chicago, 433 F.3d 542,
546 (7th Cir. 2006) (AAltering or amending a judgment under Rule 59(e) is
permissible when there is newly discovered evidence or there has been a manifest
error of law or fact.@)(citing Bordelon v. Chicago Sch. Reform Bd. of Trs., 233 F.3d
524, 529 (7th Cir. 2000)).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
United States Penitentiary
P.O. Box 33
Terre Haute, IN 47808
Hon. Jane Magnus-Stinson, Judge
United States District Court
Southern District of Indiana
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?