Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-alnd-4_09-cv-00964/USCOURTS-alnd-4_09-cv-00964-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

MIDDLE DIVISION

JOHN D. DUPREE,

 Petitioner,

v.

BILLY MITCHEM and THE 

ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE

STATE OF ALABAMA,

 Respondents.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

 Case Number: 4:09-cvB00964-KOB-JHE

 

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On May 5, 2015, the magistrate judge entered a Report and Recommendation, (doc. 26),

recommending that the remaining claim in this petition for writ of habeas corpus be dismissed with

prejudice. No objections have been filed.1 The court has considered the entire file in this action,

together with the report and recommendation, and has reached an independent conclusion that the

report and recommendation is due to be adopted and approved.

The court finds that, to the extent Dupree raised his claims of ineffective assistance of

counsel by Bone in his Rule 32 proceeding, the dismissal of such claim by the Alabama Court of

1When the magistrate judge entered his report and recommendation, the court sent an

electronic notice to the attorney of record listed on the docket sheet. The court later learned that

the petitioner may not have received the notice. On May 27, 2015, the court sent a an order

explaining what happened and a copy of the report and recommendation to the petitioner. (Doc.

27). This Order gave the petitioner an additional fourteen days to file objections to the report and

recommendation. On June 10, 2015, the court received a letter from the petitioner explaining he

received the order and providing an updated mailing address. (Doc. 28). The petitioner stated

that he had not received a copy of the report and recommendation. By Order entered June 11,

2015, the court sent another copy of the report and recommendation to the petitioner, this time at

the updated address he provided. (Doc. 29). The court gave the petitioner fourteen days from the

entry date of that Order to file objections to the report and recommendation. (Id.). 

FILED

 2015 Jul-14 PM 04:03

U.S. DISTRICT COURT

N.D. OF ALABAMA

Case 4:09-cv-00964-KOB-JHE Document 30 Filed 07/14/15 Page 1 of 2
Criminal Appeals was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of Strickland. Alternatively,

the court finds that if the specific challenges to Bone’s representation were not encompassed in his

Rule 32 proceeding, then that claim is procedurally barred. 

Accordingly, the court ADOPTS and approves the findings and recommendation of the

magistrate judge as the findings and conclusions of this court. The petition for writ of habeas corpus

is due to be DISMISSED. A separate Order will be entered. 

This court may issue a certificate of appealability “only if the applicant has a made a

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). To make such

a showing, a “petitioner must demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find the district court’s

assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong,” Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484

(2000), or that “the issues presented were adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further,”

Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003) (internal quotations omitted). This court finds

Petitioner’s claim does not satisfy either standard and will not issue a certificate of appealability.

DONE and ORDERED this 14th

day of July, 2015.

____________________________________

 KARON OWEN BOWDRE

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2

Case 4:09-cv-00964-KOB-JHE Document 30 Filed 07/14/15 Page 2 of 2