Case No. 1:14-CV-1218-WKW.

NEIL WALKER, # 095197, Petitioner, v. KARLA JONES, Warden, STEVE MARSHALL, The Attorney General of the State of Alabama, and STATE OF ALABAMA, Respondents.

United States District Court, M.D. Alabama, Southern Division.

Editors Note
Applicable Law: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Cause: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Nature of Suit: 530 Habeas Corpus (General)
Source: PACER

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Neil Walker, Plaintiff, Pro Se.

Karla Jones, Defendant, represented by Beth Slate Poe , Office of the Attorney General.

Luther Strange, Defendant, represented by Beth Slate Poe , Office of the Attorney General.

State of Alabama, Defendant, represented by Beth Slate Poe , Office of the Attorney General.


W. KEITH WATKINS, Chief District Judge.

On December 21, 2016, the Magistrate Judge filed a Recommendation. (Doc. # 23.) On January 9, 2017, Petitioner Neil Walker filed objections. (Doc. # 24.) The court has conducted an independent and de novo review of those portions of the Recommendation to which objection is made. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b).

Petitioner's objections do not offer any substantive legal or factual argument concerning the critical finding of the Magistrate Judge: that the court lacks jurisdiction over the petition because it is a successive petition filed without the required certificate from the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. The record supports the Magistrate Judge's findings and conclusions of law.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED as follows:

(1) The Recommendation (Doc. # 23) is ADOPTED.

(2) Petitioner's objections (Doc. # 24) are OVERRULED.

(3) This action is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction because Petitioner failed to obtain the requisite order from the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals authorizing this court to consider his successive § 2254 petition.

A separate final judgment will be entered.


1. Steve Marshall succeeded Luther Strange as Attorney General. Therefore, Steve Marshall is automatically substituted for Luther Strange as a Defendant by operation of Rule 25(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.


1000 Characters Remaining

Leagle.com reserves the right to edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions.

User Comments

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases