Summary
In Jones, the Eleventh Circuit recognized that "[t]he Supreme Court has twice considered - and twice rejected - an Ex Post Facto challenge to a state's increase in the interval between parole reviews."
Summary of this case from Courtney v. CoonrodOpinion
Case No.: 3:14cv195/MCR/EMT
02-09-2015
KAYLE SMITH, Petitioner, v. JULIE L. JONES, Respondent.
ORDER
This cause comes on for consideration upon the chief magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation dated January 13, 2015. (Doc. 31). The parties have been furnished a copy of the Report and Recommendation and have been afforded an opportunity to file objections pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1). I have made a de novo determination of any timely filed objections.
Having considered the Report and Recommendation, and any objections thereto timely filed, I have determined that the Report and Recommendation should be adopted.
Accordingly, it is now ORDERED as follows:
1. The chief magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation is adopted and incorporated by reference in this order.
2. Respondent's motion to dismiss (doc. 18) is GRANTED IN PART as follows:
a. Respondent's motion is GRANTED as to Grounds One through Five, Nine through Eleven, and Thirteen of Petitioner's habeas petition (doc. 1); and
b. Respondent motion to dismiss is DENIED without prejudice as to Ground Twelve of Petitioner's habeas petition.
3. Grounds One through Eleven and Thirteen of Petitioner's habeas petition (doc. 1) are DISMISSED with prejudice.
4. The matter is hereby remanded to the assigned magistrate judge for further proceedings on Ground Twelve of Petitioner's habeas petition.
DONE AND ORDERED this 9th day of February 2015.
/s/ _________
M. CASEY RODGERS
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE