Norwood v. Fox, No. 2:2012cv00206 - Document 12 (E.D. Ark. 2015)
Court Description: ORDER adopting 8 Proposed Findings and Recommendations in their entirety as this Court's findings in all respects; dismissing with prejudice plaintiff's 1 petition for writ of habeas corpus; denying as moot 11 motion to clarify. Signed by Judge Kristine G. Baker on 3/30/2015. (ks)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Norwood v. Fox Doc. 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS EASTERN DIVISION STEPHEN WAYNE NORWOOD v. PETITIONER Case No. 2:12-cv-00206-KGB JOHN FOX, Interim Warden, FCI—Forrest City RESPONDENT ORDER The Court has received Proposed Findings and Recommendations from United States Magistrate Judge Jerome T. Kearney (Dkt. No. 8). Petitioner Stephen Wayne Norwood has objected (Dkt. No. 9) and also filed a motion to amend his objections (Dkt. No. 10) and a motion to clarify the pleadings (Dkt. No. 11). The Court grants Mr. Norwood’s motion to amend his objections (Dkt. No. 10) and has considered his initial and amended objections. After careful consideration of the Proposed Findings and Recommendations and Mr. Norwood’s objections, as well as a de novo review of the record, the Court concludes that the Proposed Findings and Recommendations should be, and hereby are, approved and adopted in their entirety as this Court’s findings in all respects. The Court dismisses with prejudice Mr. Norwood’s petition for writ of habeas corpus. The Court denies as moot Mr. Norwood’s request to clarify the pleadings (Dkt. No. 11). SO ORDERED this the 30th day of March, 2015. _____________________________ Kristine G. Baker United States District Judge Dockets.Justia.com
]]>
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.
