BARBEE v. STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

Filing 6

ORDER AND RECOMMENDATION - MAGISTRATE JUDGE signed by MAG/JUDGE L. PATRICK AULD on 03/15/2011. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that in forma pauperis status is granted for the sole purpose of entering this Order and Recommendation. The Clerk is instructed to send Petitioner § 2254 forms, instructions, and a current application to proceed in forma pauperis. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioners Motion for Appointment of Counsel is denied for being moot in light of the recommendation of dismissal. IT IS RECOMMENDED that this action be filed, but then dismissed sua sponte without prejudice to Petitioner filing a new petition which corrects the defects of the current petition.(Taylor, Abby)

Download PDF
-LPA BARBEE v. STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA Doc. 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA DARRELL WADE BARBEE, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) ) STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, ) ) Respondent. ) 1:11CV203 ORDER AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Petitioner, a prisoner of the State of North Carolina, has submitted a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for writ of habeas corpus by a person in state custody, together with an application to proceed in forma pauperis and a motion seeking to have counsel appointed. For the following reasons, the Petition cannot be further processed. 1. Petitioner has not used the required § 2254 Forms. Rule 2, R. Gov. § 2254 Cases. The Clerk will forward to Petitioner the proper forms. An insufficient number of copies was furnished. Petitioner must submit the original and two copies. Petitioner has not named his custodian as the respondent. Rule 2, Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, requires that the petition name the state officer having custody of the applicant as respondent. The Court takes judicial notice that a proper respondent for North Carolina state prisoners challenging their North Carolina judgment of conviction is the Secretary of the North Carolina Department of Correction. Naming the wrong custodian is a common point of confusion, and the Court assumes that Petitioner wishes to name the proper custodian as respondent. Accordingly, unless Petitioner objects within eleven days of the issuance of this Order, the Petition is deemed from this point forward to be amended to name Alvin W. Keller, Jr., who is currently the Secretary of the North Carolina Department of Correction, as respondent. 2. 3. Dockets.Justia.com Because of these pleading failures, the Petition should be filed and then dismissed, without prejudice to Petitioner filing a new petition on the proper habeas corpus forms with the $5.00 filing fee, or a completed application to proceed in forma pauperis, and otherwise correcting the defects noted. The Court has no authority to toll the statute of limitation, therefore it continues to run, and Petitioner must act quickly if he wishes to pursue this petition. See Spencer v. Sutton, 239 F.3d 626 (4th Cir. 2001). To further aid Petitioner, the Clerk is instructed to send Petitioner a new application to proceed in forma pauperis, new § 2254 forms, and instructions for filing a § 2254 petition, which Petitioner should follow. In forma pauperis status will be granted for the sole purpose of entering this Order and Recommendation. Also, the recommended dismissal of the case means that Petitioner's Motion for Appointment of Counsel is moot and will be denied without prejudice. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that in forma pauperis status is granted for the sole purpose of entering this Order and Recommendation. The Clerk is instructed to send Petitioner § 2254 forms, instructions, and a current application to proceed in forma pauperis. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner's Motion for Appointment of Counsel is denied for being moot in light of the recommendation of dismissal. IT IS RECOMMENDED that this action be filed, but then dismissed sua sponte without prejudice to Petitioner filing a new petition which corrects the defects of the current petition. /s/ L. Patrick Auld L. Patrick Auld United States Magistrate Judge March 15, 2011 -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?