Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Thomas v. N.J. State Parole Bd.

March 12, 2010

DAVE THOMAS, PETITIONER,
v.
N.J. STATE PAROLE BD., RESPONDENTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Simandle, District Judge

Hon. Jerome B. Simandle

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This matter is before the Court upon preliminary review pursuant to Habeas Rule 4 of an application for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The Court finds as follows:

1. On October 1, 2009, Dave Thomas, a state-sentenced inmate incarcerated at Bayside State Prison, filed an application for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, in Thomas v. N.J. State Parole Bd, Civil Action No. 09-5026 (JBS). The application concerned Petitioner's parole, but did not specify the determination Petitioner was challenging or set forth federal grounds, facts supporting each federal ground, or the relief requested. By Order entered October 14, 2009, this Court dismissed the application without prejudice for failure to comply with the rules governing habeas corpus pleadings. The dismissal of the application was without prejudice to the filing of a new habeas application that complied with the habeas rules.

2. On January 19, 2010, Petitioner executed a new Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, which challenges a judgment of the New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division, dated December 28, 2009, remanding a parole matter to the New Jersey State Parole Board. (Docket entry #1 at p. 2.) The Petition does not specify the final administrative parole determination being challenged.

3. Section 2254(a) of Title 28 provides in relevant part:

(a) [A] district court shall entertain an application for a writ of habeas corpus in behalf of a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court only on the ground that he is in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States.

28 U.S.C. § 2254(a).

4. Habeas Rule 4 requires the assigned judge to sua sponte dismiss a habeas petition or application without ordering a responsive pleading under certain circumstances:

The clerk must promptly forward the petition to a judge under the court's assignment procedure, and the judge must promptly examine it. If it plainly appears from the petition and any attached exhibits that the petitioner is not entitled to relief in the district court, the judge must dismiss the petition and direct the clerk to notify the petitioner . . . .

28 U.S.C. § 2254 Rule 4.

5. Habeas Rule 2 provides:

(c) Form. The petition must:

(1) specify all the grounds for relief available to ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.