Grady v. State of Mississippi

Filing 29

ORDER denying 25 Motion for Relief from Judgment or Order. Signed by District Judge Sharion Aycock on 3/9/17. (rel)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI ABERDEEN DIVISION CHRISTOPHER GRADY PETITIONER v. No. 1:15CV172-SA-DAS STATE OF MISSISSIPPI RESPONDENT ORDER DENYING PETITIONER=S MOTION [25] FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT OR ORDER This matter comes before the court on the petitioner=s motion for reconsideration of the court=s final judgment [16], which the petitioner has styled a “Petition for Writ of Certiorari/Collateral/Habeas Corpus Relief.” The court interprets the motion, using the liberal standard for pro se litigants set forth in Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 (1972), as a motion for relief from a judgment or order under FED. R. CIV. P. 60. An order granting relief under Rule 60 must be based upon: (1) clerical mistakes, (2) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect, (3) newly discovered evidence, (4) fraud or other misconduct of an adverse party, (5) a void judgment, or (6) any other reason justifying relief from the operation of the order. In the instant motion to reconsider, the petitioner has not addressed the reason for the court’s dismissal of this case – that he failed to exhaust state remedies. Instead, it appears that he merely reiterated the grounds for relief presented in his original petition. Thus, the petitioner has neither asserted nor proven any of the specific justifications for relief from an order permitted under Rule 60. In addition, the petitioner has not presented Aany other reason justifying relief from the operation@ of the judgment. As such, the petitioner=s request for reconsideration is DENIED. SO ORDERED, this, the 9th day of March, 2017. /s/ Sharion Aycock U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE

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?