Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-alnd-2_13-cv-00490/USCOURTS-alnd-2_13-cv-00490-0/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)

---

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

STANLEY ARTHUR LAWSON,

Petitioner,

v.

KIM THOMAS, et al.,

Respondents.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 2:13-cv-00490-VEH-SGC

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This is an action on a petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 2254 by Stanley Arthur Lawson, a state prisoner proceeding pro se. (Doc. 1).

The magistrate judge entered a report and recommendation on December 17, 2015,

recommending Lawson’s § 2254 petition be denied as barred by the statute of

limitations set out in 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1). (Doc. 12). In the alternative, the

magistrate judge recommended Lawson’s Fourth Amendment claims be dismissed as

non-cognizable and his claimsthat the prosecution failed to disclose favorable evidence

and his attorney rendered ineffective assistance be denied as procedurally defaulted.

(Id.). Finally, in accordance withRule 11 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases,

the magistrate judge recommended a certificate of appealability be denied. (Id.).

Lawson was afforded fourteen (14) days to file objections to the report and

1

FILED

 2016 Jan-13 AM 09:15

U.S. DISTRICT COURT

N.D. OF ALABAMA

Case 2:13-cv-00490-VEH-SGC Document 13 Filed 01/13/16 Page 1 of 2
recommendation. (See id.). More than fourteen (14) days have passed, and the court

has received no objections from Lawson.

After careful consideration of the record in this case and the magistrate judge’s

report, the court ADOPTS that report and ACCEPTS the magistrate judge’s

recommendations. Accordingly, Lawson’s § 2254 petition is due to be denied as timebarred. In the alternative, Lawson’s Fourth Amendment claims are due to be dismissed

as non-cognizable and his claims that the prosecution failed to disclose favorable

evidence and his attorney rendered ineffective assistance are due to be denied as

procedurally defaulted. Furthermore, for the reasons set forth in the report and

recommendation and pursuant to Rule 11 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases,

a certificate of appealability is DENIED.

A final judgment will be entered.

DONE and ORDERED this the 13th day of January, 2016.

 

 VIRGINIA EMERSON HOPKINS

United States District Judge

2

Case 2:13-cv-00490-VEH-SGC Document 13 Filed 01/13/16 Page 2 of 2