Dickinson v. Masan, et al (INMATE 2)
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|Date Filed||#||Document Text|
|February 6, 2014
ORDER directing, after an independent review of the file, it is the ORDER, JUDGMENT and DECREE of the court that: (1) The petitioner's objection (Doc. # 48 ) to the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is overruled; (2) The Recommendation of t he Magistrate Judge (Doc. # 47 ) is adopted; (3) The petition for habeas corpus relief filed by Shawn Dickinson is DENIED as it was not filed within the one-year period of limitation mandated by 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1), and this case is DISMISSED with prejudice. Signed by Honorable Judge Mark E. Fuller on 2/6/14. (scn, )
|October 17, 2011
ORDER directing that on or before November 7, 2011 Petitioner shall show cause why his federal habeas petition should not be denied as it was not filed within the one-year limitation period established by 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1), as further set out. Signed by Honorable Judge Terry F. Moorer on 10/17/11. (scn, )
|September 26, 2011
ORDER ON MOTION directing that, upon consideration of the 14 Motion and for good cause, it is ORDERED that Petitioner's 14 motion to amend is GRANTED; the Clerk is DIRECTED to mail copy of this order and the amended petition to the Attorney General for the State of Alabama and cause a copy of the same to be served upon Warden Mason; an answer to the amended petition shall be filed on or before October 17, 2011, as further set out. Signed by Honorable Judge Terry F. Moorer on 9/26/11. (scn, )
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system.
A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Alabama Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
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?