Rasheed v. Smith

Full title: ABDULLAH M. RASHEED, Petitioner, v. HUGH SMITH, Warden, Respondent

Court: United States District Court, N.D. Georgia, Atlanta Division

Date published: Jul 11, 2006

Civil Action File No. 1:05-CV-629-TWT (N.D. Ga. Jul. 11, 2006)

Opinion

Civil Action File No. 1:05-CV-629-TWT.

July 11, 2006

OPINION AND ORDER

THOMAS THRASH JR., District Judge

This is a pro se habeas corpus action. It is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation [Doc. 19] of the Magistrate Judge recommending dismissing the Petition. The Petitioner objects to the portion of the Report and Recommendation finding that the portion of Claim Three relating to an alleged "amendment" to the indictment was unexhausted. Mere reference to an amendment to the indictment during argument at the hearing on the state habeas corpus proceeding is insufficient to fairly present the issue to the state court. The Magistrate Judge properly found that this claim was unexhausted. In any event, it is certain that the state habeas corpus court would have found that the claim was procedurally defaulted by failing to present it at trial and on direct appeal. The Court approves and adopts the Report and Recommendation as the judgment of the Court. This action is DISMISSED.

SO ORDERED.