Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-alnd-1_12-cv-00789/USCOURTS-alnd-1_12-cv-00789-0/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)

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

EASTERN DIVISION

SHANNON WAYNE BROWN, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

v. ) 1:12-cv-00789-KOB-JEO

)

CHERYL PRICE, Warden, and )

the ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE )

STATE OF ALABAMA, )

)

Respondents. )

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This habeas corpus case, brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, was filed by Shannon Wayne

Brown, an Alabama state prisoner acting pro se. (Doc. 1). On January 5, 2015, the magistrate judge

entered a Report and Recommendation, see 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), that habeas relief be denied. (Doc.

11). Petitioner has now filed an objection to the Report. (Doc. 12)

In his objection, Petitioner concedes that his only potentially viable claim for review is that his

trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to jury instructions. (Doc. 12 at 1). In support,

however, Petitioner offers only a conclusory assertion that the magistrate judge’s recommendation

conflicts generally with the standards for establishing ineffective assistance of counsel under

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984). 

Having carefully reviewed and considered de novo all the materials in the court file, including

the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation and Petitioner’s objections, the court is of the

opinion that the magistrate judge’s findings are due to be and are hereby ADOPTED and his

FILED

 2015 Jan-30 PM 01:06

U.S. DISTRICT COURT

N.D. OF ALABAMA

Case 1:12-cv-00789-KOB-JEO Document 13 Filed 01/30/15 Page 1 of 2
recommendation is ACCEPTED. Petitioner’s objections are OVERRULED. As a result, the

petition for writ of habeas corpus is due to be denied and this action is due to DISMISSED WITH

PREJUDICE. Furthermore, because the petition does not present issues that are debatable among

jurists of reason, a certificate of appealability is also due to be DENIED. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c);

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484-85 (2000); Rule 11(a), RULES GOVERNING § 2254

PROCEEDINGS. A separate Final Order will be entered.

DONE, this the 30th day of January, 2015.

 ____________________________________

 KARON OWEN BOWDRE

 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2

Case 1:12-cv-00789-KOB-JEO Document 13 Filed 01/30/15 Page 2 of 2