From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Thurman v. Sanders

United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Helena Division
Aug 14, 2006
Case No. 2:06CV00114 SWW/HDY (E.D. Ark. Aug. 14, 2006)

Opinion

Case No. 2:06CV00114 SWW/HDY.

August 14, 2006


ORDER


The Court has received proposed Findings and Recommendations from Magistrate Judge H. David Young. After careful review of those Findings and Recommendations, the timely objections received thereto, and a de novo review of the record, the Court concludes that the Findings and Recommendations should be, and hereby are, approved and adopted in their entirety as this Court's findings in all but the following respect. It does appear that Judgment in petitioner's federal criminal case was issued by United States District Judge Joe J. Fisher on March 15, 1991, not March 2001.

It is clear that petitioner has not completed the administrative review process outlined at 28 C.F.R. § 542.10 through 542.19. Before he may seek relief in federal court, petitioner must file an appeal with the General Counsel, the final step in the process. Until he does so, the Court does not know what the General Counsel will do with petitioner's claim, and until the General Counsel is given an opportunity to act, petitioner has not exhausted his administrative remedies. The Office of General Counsel may deny the appeal on the ground that it is untimely or it may allow petitioner to file the appeal out of time and rule on the merits.

Because petitioner has not shown that such an appeal would be futile, the Court dismisses his petition for failure to exhaust his administrative remedies. Judgment will be entered accordingly.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Thurman v. Sanders

United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Helena Division
Aug 14, 2006
Case No. 2:06CV00114 SWW/HDY (E.D. Ark. Aug. 14, 2006)
Case details for

Thurman v. Sanders

Case Details

Full title:WILLIAM MYRON THURMAN, Petitioner, v. LINDA SANDERS, WARDEN, FCI FORREST…

Court:United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Helena Division

Date published: Aug 14, 2006

Citations

Case No. 2:06CV00114 SWW/HDY (E.D. Ark. Aug. 14, 2006)

Citing Cases

Tensley v. T.C. Outlaw

Exhaustion, however, is not required if it would be futile. Thurman v. Sanders, No. 2:06CV00114-SWW-HDY, 2006…

Lewis v. Outlaw

Exhaustion, however, is not required if it would be futile. Thurman v. Sanders, No. 2:06CV00114-SWW-HDY, 2006…