Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 76 views

    Brumfield v. Cain Et Al (INMATE 2) - Document No. 3

    Uploaded by

    Justia.com
    REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by George A. Brumfield, it is the Recommendation of the Mag. Judge that this case be transferred to the USDC for the NDAL pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. 2241(d); Objections to R&R due by 8/30/2005. Signed by Judge Delores R. Boyd on 8/17/05. (vmc, ) 2:2005cv00768 Alabama Middle District Court

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Brumfield v. Cain Et Al (INMATE 2) - Document No. 3

    Uploaded by

    Justia.com
    76 views2 pages
    REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by George A. Brumfield, it is the Recommendation of the Mag. Judge that this case be transferred to the USDC for the NDAL pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. 2241(d); Objections to R&R due by 8/30/2005. Signed by Judge Delores R. Boyd on 8/17/05. (vmc, ) 2:2005cv00768 Alabama Middle District Court

    Original Title

    Brumfield v. Cain et al (INMATE 2) - Document No. 3

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by George A. Brumfield, it is the Recommendation of the Mag. Judge that this case be transferred to the USDC for the NDAL pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. 2241(d); Objections to R&R due by 8/30/2005. Signed by Judge Delores R. Boyd on 8/17/05. (vmc, ) 2:2005cv00768 Alabama Middle District Court

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    76 views2 pages

    Brumfield v. Cain Et Al (INMATE 2) - Document No. 3

    Uploaded by

    Justia.com
    REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by George A. Brumfield, it is the Recommendation of the Mag. Judge that this case be transferred to the USDC for the NDAL pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. 2241(d); Objections to R&R due by 8/30/2005. Signed by Judge Delores R. Boyd on 8/17/05. (vmc, ) 2:2005cv00768 Alabama Middle District Court

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 2

    Brumfield v. Cain et al (INMATE 2) Doc.

    3
    Case 2:05-cv-00768-WHA-DRB Document 3 Filed 08/17/2005 Page 1 of 2

    IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT


    FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
    NORTHERN DIVISION
    _______________________________

    GEORGE A. BRUMFIELD, #89824 *

    Petitioner, *

    v. *CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:05-CV-768-A


    (WO)
    BURL CAIN, WARDEN, et al., *

    Respondents. *
    _______________________________

    RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

    In this petition for habeas corpus filed on August 11, 2005, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §

    2254, George Brumfield (“Brumfield”) challenges a conviction and sentence imposed

    upon him by the Circuit Court for Tuscaloosa County, Alabama.

    “In the exercise of its discretion and in furtherance of justice,” this court may transfer

    this habeas petition to “the district court for the district within which the State court was held

    which convicted” Brumfield. 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d). Tuscaloosa County is located within the

    jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama, and the

    court deems it appropriate to transfer this case to that District for ruling on Brumfield’s

    application for in forma pauperis status and final determination of the petition.

    Accordingly, it is the RECOMMENDATION of the Magistrate Judge that this case

    be transferred to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama

    pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d).

    Dockets.Justia.com
    Case 2:05-cv-00768-WHA-DRB Document 3 Filed 08/17/2005 Page 2 of 2

    It is further

    ORDERED that the parties are DIRECTED to file any objections to the said

    Recommendation on or before August 30, 2005. Any objections filed must specifically

    identify the findings in the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation objected to. Frivolous,

    conclusive or general objections will not be considered by the District Court. The parties are

    advised that this Recommendation is not a final order of the court and, therefore, it is not

    appealable.

    Failure to file written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations in the

    Magistrate Judge's report shall bar the party from a de novo determination by the District

    Court of issues covered in the report and shall bar the party from attacking on appeal factual

    findings in the report accepted or adopted by the District Court except upon grounds of plain

    error or manifest injustice. Nettles v. Wainwright, 677 F.2d 404 (5 th Cir. 1982). See Stein

    v. Reynolds Securities, Inc., 667 F.2d 33 (11 th Cir. 1982). See also Bonner v. City of

    Prichard, 661 F.2d 1206 (11th Cir. 1981, en banc), adopting as binding precedent all of the

    decisions of the former Fifth Circuit handed down prior to the close of business on

    September 30, 1981.

    Done this 17th day of August, 2005.

    /s/ Delores R. Boyd


    DELORES R. BOYD
    UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

    You might also like