Short v. Donahue

Filing 15

ORDER: For the reasons explained more fully in the memorandum entered contemporaneously herewith, the respondent's motion to dismiss 11 is hereby GRANTED for failure to exhaust state court remedies. Accordingly, the petition is DENIED, and this action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to refile once the petitioner has exhausted his state court remedies. The dismissal also is without prejudice with regard to the petitioner's ability to refile actions under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. I n this case, reasonable jurists cannot conclude that the court abused its discretion in granting respondents motion to dismiss. Thus, the court DENIES a certificate of appealability. Signed by Chief Judge Kevin H. Sharp on 3/26/15. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(dt)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
NASHVILLE DIVISION
NICHOLAS SHORT,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Petitioner,
v.
MICHEAL DONAHUE,
Respondent.

No. 3:14-cv-02313
Chief Judge Sharp

ORDER
Pending before the court is a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 2254 (Docket No. 1) filed by Nicholas Short (#442776), an inmate at the Hardeman County
Correctional Facility in Whiteville, Tennessee. The petitioner is serving a term of life imprisonment
imposed by the Davidson County Criminal Court on June 18, 2010, for one count of first degree
premeditated murder and one count of second degree murder during the perpetration of an especially
aggravated robbery. (Docket No. 1 at p. 3).
For the reasons explained more fully in the memorandum entered contemporaneously
herewith, the respondent’s motion to dismiss (Docket No. 11) is hereby GRANTED for failure to
exhaust state court remedies.
Accordingly, the petition is DENIED, and this action is DISMISSED WITHOUT
PREJUDICE to refile once the petitioner has exhausted his state court remedies. The dismissal also
is without prejudice with regard to the petitioner’s ability to refile actions under 28 U.S.C. § 2241.
In this case, reasonable jurists cannot conclude that the court abused its discretion in granting
respondent’s motion to dismiss. Thus, the court DENIES a certificate of appealability.

1

This order constitutes final judgment in the action.
It is so ORDERED.

Kevin H. Sharp
Chief United States District Judge

2