Porterfield v. United States of America (INMATE 3), No. 2:2017cv00725 - Document 5 (M.D. Ala. 2017)
Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER: it is the ORDER, JUDGMENT, and DECREE of the court that petitioner's 4 MOTION to Withdraw is treated as a notice of dismissal and that this action is dismissed without prejudice by operation of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41; directing the clerk to close this case. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 11/20/17. (Attachments: # 1 civil appeals checklist)(djy, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Porterfield v. United States of America (INMATE 3) Doc. 5 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION BRYANT PORTERFIELD, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:17cv725-MHT (WO) OPINION AND ORDER On October 20, 2017, petitioner Bryant Porterfied filed a pro se pleading styled as a “Motion to Compel Specific Performance of an 11(c)(1)(C) Plea Agreement” in criminal claims 2:09cr204-MHT, apparently sentence. this case challenging in which his he asserts conviction and This court ordered the motion to be filed in new civil case. Through an order entered on October 30, 2017, the court informed Porterfield that his claims motion pursuant to to would have vacate, 28 set U.S.C. been properly aside, § 2255. or presented correct in a sentence Additionally, in accordance with Castro v. United States, 540 U.S. 375 Dockets.Justia.com (2003), the court notified Porterfield of its intention to treat his filing as such a motion and directed Porterfield to advise the court if he wished (1) to proceed on his motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255; (2) to amend his motion to assert additional claims under 28 U.S. § 2255; (3) or to withdraw his motion. On November 9, 2017, Porterfield filed a response to the court’s October 30 order in which he states that he is not seeking relief under § 2255 and asks the court to withdraw his motion. The court will grant Porterfield’s request to withdraw his motion and will construe Porterfield’s response as a notice of voluntary dismissal pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i). *** Accordingly, it is the ORDER, JUDGMENT, and DECREE of the court that petitioner Bryant Porterfield’s motion to withdraw (doc. no. 4) is treated as a notice of dismissal and that this action is dismissed without prejudice by operation of 2 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41. The clerk of the court is DIRECTED to close this case. DONE, this the 20th day of November, 2017. /s/ Myron H. Thompson UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
