Jones v. Warden Lafayette Parish Correction Center

Justia Dockets & Filings Fifth Circuit Louisiana Western District Jones v. Warden Lafayette Parish Correction Center

Jones v. Warden Lafayette Parish Correction Center

Plaintiff:	Douglas C Jones
Defendant:	Warden Lafayette Parish Correctional Center
Case Number:	6:2009cv00086
Filed:	January 15, 2010
Court:	US District Court for the Western District of Louisiana
Office:	Lafayette Office
Presiding Judge:	Rebecca F Doherty
Presiding Judge:	Mildred E Methvin
Nature of Suit:	Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
August 19, 2009	Filing 11 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 6 Amended Complaint filed by Douglas C Jones, 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Douglas C Jones, 9 Amended Complaint filed by Douglas C Jones. IT IS RECOMMENDED that this petition for habeas corpus shou ld be DENIED AND DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE because petitioners claims are barred by the one-year limitation period codified at 28 U.S.C. §2244(d); and, since petitioner failed to exhaust available state court remedies and his claims, although now technically exhausted, it must be dismissed as procedurally defaulted; IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that the petition for habeas corpus should be DENIED AND DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases since petitioner has not established that he is in custody in violation of the Constitution and laws of the United States. Objections to R&R due by 9/8/2009. Signed by Magistrate Judge Mildred E Methvin on 8/18/09. (crt,Roaix, G)

Date Filed

Document Text

August 19, 2009

Filing 11 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 6 Amended Complaint filed by Douglas C Jones, 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Douglas C Jones, 9 Amended Complaint filed by Douglas C Jones. IT IS RECOMMENDED that this petition for habeas corpus shou ld be DENIED AND DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE because petitioners claims are barred by the one-year limitation period codified at 28 U.S.C. §2244(d); and, since petitioner failed to exhaust available state court remedies and his claims, although now technically exhausted, it must be dismissed as procedurally defaulted; IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that the petition for habeas corpus should be DENIED AND DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases since petitioner has not established that he is in custody in violation of the Constitution and laws of the United States. Objections to R&R due by 9/8/2009. Signed by Magistrate Judge Mildred E Methvin on 8/18/09. (crt,Roaix, G)

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 Louisiana Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Jones v. Warden Lafayette Parish Correction Center
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Douglas C Jones
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: Warden Lafayette Parish Correctional Center
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.

Why Is My Information Online?