HARBISON v. U.S., 2:13-CV-589-WKW. (2015)
Court: District Court, M.D. Alabama
Number: infdco20150819602
Visitors: 9
Filed: Aug. 18, 2015
Latest Update: Aug. 18, 2015
Summary: ORDER W. KEITH WATKINS , Chief District Judge . On June 18, 2015, the Magistrate Judge filed a Recommendation in this case. (Doc. # 20.) On July 27, 2015, Petitioner filed Objections to the Recommendation. 1 The court has reviewed de novo those portions of the Recommendation to which Petitioner has objected. See 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1). Upon consideration of the Recommendation and the Objections, it is ORDERED that the Objections are OVERRULED, that the Recommendation is ADOPTED, and th
Summary: ORDER W. KEITH WATKINS , Chief District Judge . On June 18, 2015, the Magistrate Judge filed a Recommendation in this case. (Doc. # 20.) On July 27, 2015, Petitioner filed Objections to the Recommendation. 1 The court has reviewed de novo those portions of the Recommendation to which Petitioner has objected. See 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1). Upon consideration of the Recommendation and the Objections, it is ORDERED that the Objections are OVERRULED, that the Recommendation is ADOPTED, and tha..
More
ORDER
W. KEITH WATKINS, Chief District Judge.
On June 18, 2015, the Magistrate Judge filed a Recommendation in this case. (Doc. # 20.) On July 27, 2015, Petitioner filed Objections to the Recommendation.1 The court has reviewed de novo those portions of the Recommendation to which Petitioner has objected. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Upon consideration of the Recommendation and the Objections, it is ORDERED that the Objections are OVERRULED, that the Recommendation is ADOPTED, and that Petitioner's § 2255 motion is DENIED with prejudice.
A separate final judgment will be entered.
FootNotes
1. The Objections were technically untimely, but Petitioner's change of address went unnoticed by the court, and Petitioner lacked notice of the Recommendation.
Source: Leagle
