From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bey v. Stone

United States District Court, Middle District of North Carolina
Aug 11, 2021
1:20CV981 (M.D.N.C. Aug. 11, 2021)

Opinion

1:20CV981

08-11-2021

ANTONIO MOSS BEY, Petitioner, v. KEITH STONE, Respondent.


ORDER

N. CARLTON TILLEY, JR. SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

On December 1, 2020, the United States Magistrate Judge's Recommendation was filed and notice was served on the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. Petitioner filed Objections [Doc. #5] within the time limit prescribed by Section 636, and a later Supplement [Doc. #6] to the Objections. The Court has reviewed Petitioner's Objections and Supplement de novo and finds that they do not change the substance of the United States Magistrate Judge's Recommendation [Doc. #3], which is affirmed and adopted.

In the Objections, Petitioner notes some difficulty obtaining the appropriate § 2254 forms. The Court will therefore direct the Clerk to send Petitioner new § 2254 forms and instructions for filing a § 2254 petition, as well as a current application to proceed in forma pauperis.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that this action is dismissed sua sponte without prejudice to Petitioner filing a corrected petition on the proper § 2254 forms which corrects the defects set out in the Recommendation, accompanied by either the $5.00 filing fee or a completed application to proceed in forma pauperis.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk is directed to send Petitioner § 2254 forms, instructions, and a current application to proceed in forma pauperis.


Summaries of

Bey v. Stone

United States District Court, Middle District of North Carolina
Aug 11, 2021
1:20CV981 (M.D.N.C. Aug. 11, 2021)
Case details for

Bey v. Stone

Case Details

Full title:ANTONIO MOSS BEY, Petitioner, v. KEITH STONE, Respondent.

Court:United States District Court, Middle District of North Carolina

Date published: Aug 11, 2021

Citations

1:20CV981 (M.D.N.C. Aug. 11, 2021)