Anderson v. Brilz et al, No. 1:2013cv00084 - Document 20 (D. Mont. 2014)
Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 18 in full. The Petition is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as time-barred. A certificate of appealability is DENIED. Signed by Judge Sam E Haddon on 9/11/2014. Mailed to Anderson. (TAG, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Anderson v. Brilz et al Doc. 20 FIL SEP 1 1 2014 Clerk, US District Court District Of Montana Helena IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA BILLINGS DIVISION MICHAEL JEFFREY ANDERSON, Petitioner, CV -13 -84-BLG-SEH vs. ORDER JAMES BRILZ, et aI., Respondents. On August 18,2014, Magistrate Judge Carolyn S. Ostby issued her Findings and Recommendation directed to Petitioner' s application for a writ ofhabeus corpus under 28 U.S:C. § 2254. 1 Objections were filed by Petitioner on September 2,2014. 2 The Court reviews de novo findings and recommendations to which objection is made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). 1 (Doc. 18.) 2 (Doc. 19.) -1- . Dockets.Justia.com Upon de novo review of the record, I find no error in Judge Ostby's findings and Recommendation and adopt them in full. ORDERED: 1. The Petition 3 is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as time-barred. 2. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter by separate document judgment in favor of Respondents and against Petitioner. 3. A certificate of appealability is DENIED. Anderson's claims do not appear to be substantial and the procedural ruling is not subject to dispute. DATED this !l4a y of September, 2014. United States District Judge J (Doc. l.) -2- .
]]>
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.
