Nunn v. United States of America (INMATE 3), No. 3:2013cv00245 - Document 5 (M.D. Ala. 2013)

Court Description: ORDER, in accordance with the memorandum opinion entered this date, it is the ORDER, JUDGMENT and DECREE of the court: (1) petitioner's 3 response is treated as his objections and said objections are overruled; (2) the US Magistrate Judge' ;s 2 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION is adopted; (3) the petition for writ of habeas corpus is denied because the required permission has not been obtained from the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals; further ORDERING that costs are taxed against petition er, for which execution may issue; directing the clerk to enter this document on the civil docket as a final judgment pursuant to Rule 58 FRCP; this case is closed. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 5/29/13. (Attachments: # 1 civil appeals checklist)(djy, )

Download PDF
Nunn v. United States of America (INMATE 3) Doc. 5 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, EASTERN DIVISION TYRONE NUNN, SR., Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:13cv245-MHT (WO) JUDGMENT In accordance with the memorandum opinion entered this date, it is the ORDER, JUDGMENT, and DECREE of the court: (1) Petitioner's response (Doc. No. 3) is treated as his objections and said objections are overruled. (2) The United States Magistrate Judge's recommendation (Doc. No. 2) is adopted. (3) The petition for writ of habeas corpus (Doc. No. 1) is denied because the required permission has Dockets.Justia.com not been obtained from the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. It is further ORDERED that costs are taxed against petitioner, for which execution may issue. The clerk of the court is DIRECTED to enter this document on the civil docket as a final judgment pursuant to Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. This case is closed. DONE, this the 29th day of May, 2013. /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.