Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Fancher v. State

United States District Court, N.D. Alabama, Southern Division

January 10, 2017

DOUGLAS FANCHER, Petitioner,
v.
STATE OF ALABAMA, et al., Respondents.

          MEMORANDUM OPINION

          ABDUL K. KALLON, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         This is an action for a writ of habeas corpus filed by Petitioner Douglas Fancher, pro se, on or about November 5, 2016. Doc. 1. Fancher, a pre-trial detainee, claims he is being held unlawfully in the Jefferson County Jail in Bessemer, Alabama. On December 8, 2016, the magistrate judge to whom the action was referred entered a report and recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) recommending that the court dismiss Fancher's habeas petition without prejudice based on his failure to exhaust available state remedies. Doc. 4. The time to object to the magistrate judge's report and recommendation has expired.

         Having carefully reviewed and considered de novo all the materials in the court file, including the magistrate judge's report and recommendation, the court is of the opinion that the magistrate judge's findings are due to be and are hereby ADOPTED and his recommendation is ACCEPTED. Accordingly, the petition for a writ of habeas corpus is due to DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

         Further, a petitioner is required to obtain a certificate of appealability in order to appeal from “the final in a habeas corpus proceeding in which the detention complained of arises out process issued by a state court.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A). That language encompasses final orders relative to habeas petitions by detainees awaiting trial in state court on criminal charges. See Evans v. Oliver, 2013 WL 4027766, at *4 (S.D. Ala. Aug. 7, 2013); Stringer v. Williams,161 F.3d 259, 262 (5th Cir. 1998); cf. Medberry v. Crosby,351 F.3d 1049, 1063 (11th Cir. 2003); Hiteshaw v. Butterfield, 262 F. App'x 162, 163 (11th Cir. 2008). It is appropriate for the court to either issue or deny a certificate of appealability when it enters a final order adverse to the applicant. See Rules 1(b), 11(a), Rules Governing ยง 2254 Habeas Proceedings. The court concludes that the ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.