Hughley v. United States of America (INMATE 3)
| Johnny Hughley |
| United States of America |
| 3:2024cv00081 |
| February 9, 2024 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Alabama |
| Charles S Coody |
| Myron H Thompson |
| Prisoner: Vacate Sentence |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 19, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 13
JUDGMENT: It is the ORDER, JUDGMENT, and DECREE of the court; Petitioner's objections (Doc. #9 and Doc. #10 ) are overruled. The United States Magistrate Judge's recommendation (Doc. #6 ) is adopted. It is further ORDERED that costs are taxed against petitioner, for which execution may issue. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 3/19/2024. (c/s) (LAB)
|
|
Filing 12
OPINION: It is ORDERED after an independent and de novo review of the record, the court concludes that the objections should be overruled and the magistrate judge's recommendation adopted. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 3/19/2024. (c/s) (LAB)
|
|
Filing 11
ORDER: It is ORDERED that petitioner's motion to amend his objections (Doc. #10 ) is granted. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 3/11/2024. (CWL)
|
|
Amended OBJECTION to #6 Report and Recommendations by Johnny Hughley. (no pdf attached - see doc #9 for pdf) (CWL)
|
|
Filing 10
MOTION to Amend #9 Objection to Recommendation by Johnny Hughley. (DMN)
|
|
Filing 9
OBJECTION to #6 Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge by Johnny Hughley. (Attachments: #1 Correspondence to Trey Granger, Clerk of Court re 3:98-cr-43)(DMN)
|
|
Filing 8
ORDER: Petitioner has filed a #7 Motion for Discovery.Petitioner fails to establish good cause under Section 2255 Rule 6 for the court to authorize discovery, and he, as a habeas petitioner, foundationally has "no right to automatic discovery." Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Petitioner's #7 Motion for Discovery is DENIED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Charles S. Coody on 5/5/2024. (DMN)
|
|
Filing 7
MOTION for Discovery by Johnny Hughley. (DMN)
|
|
Filing 6
RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE that Hughley's self-styled "Nunc Pro Tunc Motion to Reopen Case for Fraud upon the Court Committed by the Court Itself to Obtain Conviction Rule 60(b)(3) & (6) (Doc. #2 )" be DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction, because it constitutes a successive 28 U.S.C. 2255 motion filed without appellate court authorization and because Hughley is not in custody for purposes of 28 U.S.C. 2255(a). Objections to R&R due by 3/15/2024. Signed by Magistrate Judge Charles S. Coody on 3/1/2024. (DMN)
|
|
Filing 5
NOTICE of Appearance by Brett J. Talley on behalf of United States of America (Talley, Brett)
|
|
Filing 4
ORDER: the Court construes the #3 Motion as a Motion to Supplement his self-styled "Nunc Pro Tunc Motion to Reopen Case for Fraud Upon the Court Committed by the Court Itself to Obtain Conviction Rule 60(b)(3) & (6)"; it is: ORDERED that Petitioner's #3 Motion to Supplement is GRANTED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Charles S. Coody on 2/20/2024. (AM)
|
|
Supplement to #2 Motion to Vacate/Set Aside/Correct Sentence (2255), docketed pursuant to the #4 Order. (NO PDF - See doc #2 ) (AM)
|
|
Filing 3
MOTION construed as a Motion to Supplement #2 Motion to Vacate/Set Aside/Correct Sentence (2255), pursuant to the #4 Order, by Johnny Hughley. (DMN) (entitled "Amend to Defendants' Nunc Pro Tunc/DPA-Breach") Modified on 2/20/2024 (AM).
|
|
Filing 2
MOTION to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Sentence (2255) (entitled "Nunc Pro Tunc Motion to Reopen Case for Fraud upon the Court Committed by the Court Itself to Obtain Conviction Rule 60(b)(3) & (6)"), filed by Johnny Hughley. (Attachments: #1 Criminal Judgment, #2 Criminal Docket Sheet)(DMN)
|
|
Filing 1
COPY OF ORDER entered in 3:98-cr-00097-MHT-CSC-1: The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to: (1) strike the Nunc Pro Tunc Motion to Reopen Case Under FRCP 60(b)(3) & (6), currently docketed as Doc. 290, and the Motion to Amend the Nunc Pro Tunc Motion, currently docketed as Doc. 291; (2) open a new civil action under 28 U.S.C. 2255 and docket these same motions in the newly opened civil actoin; (3) assign the newly opened civil action to the appropriate Magistrate Judge and District Judge; and (4) refer the case file to the appropriate Magistrate Judge for further proceedings upon completion of the foregoing directives. Signed by Magistrate Judge Charles S. Coody on 2/9/2024. (DMN)
|
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
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Hughley v. United States of America (INMATE 3) | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Johnny Hughley | |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: United States of America | |
| Represented By: | Louis V. Franklin, Sr. |
| Represented By: | Matthew W. Shepherd |
| Represented By: | Brett J. Talley |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
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.
