Filed: Aug. 01, 2018
Latest Update: Aug. 01, 2018
Summary: ORDER JOHN W. deGRAVELLES , District Judge . Pro se Petitioner, an inmate previously incarcerated at the Avoyelles Correctional Center ("ACC"), Cottonport, Louisiana, filed this habeas corpus proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254, challenging his 2008 conviction and sentence entered in the Nineteenth Judicial Court for the Parish of East Baton Rouge, State of Louisiana, on a charge of attempted second degree murder. Pursuant to Magistrate Judge's Report dated June 15, 2018 (R. Doc. 13)
Summary: ORDER JOHN W. deGRAVELLES , District Judge . Pro se Petitioner, an inmate previously incarcerated at the Avoyelles Correctional Center ("ACC"), Cottonport, Louisiana, filed this habeas corpus proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254, challenging his 2008 conviction and sentence entered in the Nineteenth Judicial Court for the Parish of East Baton Rouge, State of Louisiana, on a charge of attempted second degree murder. Pursuant to Magistrate Judge's Report dated June 15, 2018 (R. Doc. 13),..
More
ORDER
JOHN W. deGRAVELLES, District Judge.
Pro se Petitioner, an inmate previously incarcerated at the Avoyelles Correctional Center ("ACC"), Cottonport, Louisiana, filed this habeas corpus proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging his 2008 conviction and sentence entered in the Nineteenth Judicial Court for the Parish of East Baton Rouge, State of Louisiana, on a charge of attempted second degree murder.
Pursuant to Magistrate Judge's Report dated June 15, 2018 (R. Doc. 13), the Magistrate Judge recommended that Petitioner's claims be dismissed as untimely and that, in the event that Petitioner sought to pursue an appeal, a Certificate of Appealability be denied. The record reflects, however, that the referenced Magistrate Judge's Report, which was forwarded to Petitioner at his record address, was returned to the Court as undeliverable, with a notation indicating that Petitioner had been "Moved from ACC," apparently because he had been released or transferred to another facility. See R. Doc. 14. Accordingly, it appears that Petitioner may have lost interest in pursuing this matter since his release or transfer from the referenced institution.
Pursuant to Local Rule 41(b)(4) of this Court, the failure of a pro se litigant to keep the Court apprised of a change of address may constitute cause for dismissal for failure to prosecute when a notice has been returned to a party or the Court for the reason of an incorrect address, and no correction has been made to the address for a period of thirty (30) days. As a practical matter, this case cannot proceed without an address where Petitioner may be reached and where he may receive pleadings, notices or rulings. Accordingly, the Court concludes that the above-captioned proceeding should be dismissed, without prejudice, for failure of Petitioner to prosecute this proceeding by failing to keep the Court apprised of a current address.
IT IS ORDERED that the above-captioned proceeding be DISMISSED, without prejudice, for failure of Petitioner to prosecute this proceeding by failing to keep the Court apprised of a current address. Judgment shall be entered accordingly.
