Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-almd-2_09-cv-00500/USCOURTS-almd-2_09-cv-00500-0/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)

---

1

Although the Clerk of this court stamped the present petition “received” on May 27, 2009, Lee certified she

placed the petition in the prison mailing system on May 26, 2009. Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus - Court Doc.

No. 1 at 15. The law is well settled that a pro se inmate’s petition is deemed filed the date it is delivered to prison

officials for mailing. Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 271-272 (1988); Adams v. United States, 173 F.3d 1339, 1340-

41 (11th Cir. 1999); Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 780 (11th Cir. 1993). “Absent evidence to the contrary in the

form of prison logs or other records, [this court] must assume that [the instant petition] was delivered to prison

authorities the day” Lee certified she undertook such action. Washington v. United States, 243 F.3d 1299, 1301 (11th

Cir. 2001). In light of the foregoing, the court considers May 26, 2009 as the date of filing. 

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

 NORTHERN DIVISION

PATRICE LEE, #262331, )

)

 Petitioner, )

)

 ) CASE NO. 2:09-CV-500-ID v.

) [WO]

CYNTHIA WHEELER-WHITE, et al., )

)

 Respondents. )

RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

This case is pending before the court on a 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for habeas

corpus relief filed by Patrice Lee [“Lee”], a state inmate, on May 26, 2009.1

 In this

petition, Lee challenges the split sentence imposed upon her by the Circuit Court of

Jefferson County, Alabama (Bessemer Division) for a 2008 robbery conviction. Lee also

requests that the trial court award her additional time-served credit on this sentence. 

DISCUSSION

This court “in the exercise of its discretion and in furtherance of justice” may

transfer an application for writ of habeas corpus to “the district court for the district within

which the State court was held which convicted” the petitioner. 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d). Lee

Case 2:09-cv-00500-ID-WC Document 4 Filed 05/29/09 Page 1 of 3
2

In transferring the instant case, this court makes no determination regarding the merits of the petitioner’s

claims for relief nor whether the petitioner has exhausted available state court remedies prior to filing a federal

habeas petition as required by 28 U.S.C.§ 2244(b)(1)(A).

2

seeks reconsideration of her split sentence in order to obtain eligibility for correctional

incentive time the award of which would allow an earlier release date. Petition for Writ of

Habeas Corpus - Court Doc. No. 1 at 5. Moreover, Lee contends the amount of credit

granted to her by the Circuit Court of Jefferson County, Alabama on the sentence imposed

in November of 2008 for second degree robbery is incorrect. Specifically, Lee requests that

such state court be required to award her additional credit towards her “for the time [she]

was out on bond” awaiting sentencing. Id. at 7. Lee advises this time period encompasses

approximately ten months. Id. Jefferson County is located within the jurisdiction of the

United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama. In light of the foregoing,

the court concludes that transfer of this case to such other court for review and disposition

is appropriate.2

CONCLUSION

 Accordingly, it is the RECOMMENDATION of the Magistrate Judge that this case

be transferred to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama

pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d). 

It is further 

ORDERED that on or before June 11, 2009 the parties may file objections to the

Recommendation. Any objections filed must specifically identify the findings in the

Case 2:09-cv-00500-ID-WC Document 4 Filed 05/29/09 Page 2 of 3
3

Magistrate Judge's Recommendation to which the party is objecting. Frivolous, conclusive

or general objections will not be considered by the District Court. The parties are advised

that this Recommendation is not a final order of the court and, therefore, it is not

appealable.

Failure to file written objections to the proposed findings in the Recommendation

shall bar the party from a de novo determination by the District Court of issues covered in

the report and shall bar the party from attacking on appeal factual findings in the report

accepted or adopted by the District Court except upon grounds of plain error or manifest

injustice. Nettles v. Wainwright, 677 F.2d 404 (5th Cir. 1982). See Stein v. Reynolds

Securities, Inc., 667 F.2d 33 (11th Cir. 1982). See also Bonner v. City of Prichard, 661 F.2d

1206 (11th Cir. 1981, en banc), adopting as binding precedent all decisions of the former

Fifth Circuit issued prior to September 30, 1981.

Done this 29th day of May, 2009.

 /s/ Wallace Capel, Jr. 

WALLACE CAPEL, JR. 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:09-cv-00500-ID-WC Document 4 Filed 05/29/09 Page 3 of 3