Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Johnson v. Johnson

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS


August 30, 2010

JAMES A. JOHNSON, PETITIONER,
v.
YOLANDE JOHNSON, RESPONDENT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Herndon, Chief Judge

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Petitioner, currently incarcerated in the Tamms Correctional Center, brings this habeas corpus action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 to challenge the constitutionality of his confinement. He seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915.

Leave to proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED.

The Court notes that Petitioner is challenging a 1995 convictions for first degree murder, attempted first degree murder, and armed robbery. Based solely on the date of conviction, the instant petition would appear to be time-barred under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1). Petitioner, however, recounts a history of direct and post-conviction relief efforts spanning numerous years. Unfortunately, the filing dates and disposition dates for these efforts is not entirely clear from the face of petition. Therefore, the Court is unable to conclude - from the face of the petition or the record available to it - that the instant petition is, in fact, time barred.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Respondent shall, within twenty-three (23) days of receipt of this application for Writ of Habeas Corpus, answer and show cause why the writ should not issue. In its answer, the Respondent shall address whether the instant action is time-barred under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1).

Service upon the Illinois Attorney General, Criminal Appeals Bureau, 100 West Randolph, 12th Floor, Chicago, Illinois 60601 shall constitute sufficient service.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that pursuant to Local Rule 72.1(a)(2), this cause is referred to a United States Magistrate Judge for further pre-trial proceedings.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this entire matter be REFERRED to a United States Magistrate Judge for disposition, as contemplated by Local Rule 72.2(b)(2) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), should all the parties consent to such a referral.

Petitioner is ADVISED of his continuing obligation to keep the Clerk [and each opposing party] informed of any change in his whereabouts during the pendency of this action. This notification shall be done in writing and not later than seven (7) days after a transfer or other change in address occurs. Failure to provide such notice may result in dismissal of this action. See FED.R.CIV.P. 41(b).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

David R Herndon DISTRICT JUDGE

20100830

© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.