Patton v. Cain et al, No. 3:2016cv00010 - Document 19 (M.D. La. 2019)
Court Description: OPINION Adopting Report and Recommendation of the U.S. Magistrate Judge:The consolidated applications of Billy Patton for issuance of a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. 2254 are SEVERED for purposes of entry of judgment;Patton's pro se hab eas petition in Civil Action 16-10 is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to exhaust state court remedies: Pattons habeas petition in Civil Action 16-40 is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as procedurally defaulted; In the event the Petitioner seeks to pursue an appeal, a certificate of appealability shall be DENIED. Signed by Judge John W. deGravelles on 03/29/2019. (KDC)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Patton v. Cain et al Doc. 19 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA BILLY PATTON CIVIL ACTION VERSUS NO. 16-10-JWD-EWD N. BURL CAIN, ET AL. CONSOLIDATED WITH BILLY PATTON CIVIL ACTION VERSUS NO. 16-40-JWD-EWD DARRYL VANNOY OPINION After independently reviewing the entire record in this case and for the reasons set forth in the Magistrate Judge's Report dated March 8, 2019, to which an opposition was filed (Doc. 18); IT IS ORDERED that the consolidated applications of Billy Patton for issuance of a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. 2254 are SEVERED for purposes of entry of judgment. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Patton’s pro se habeas petition in Civil Action 16-10 is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to exhaust state court remedies. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Patton’s habeas petition in Civil Action 16-40 is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as procedurally defaulted. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, in the event the Petitioner seeks to pursue an appeal, a certificate of appealability shall be DENIED. Judgment shall be entered accordingly. Signed in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, on March 29, 2019. S JUDGE JOHN W. deGRAVELLES UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA 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.
