From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jackson v. Hobbs

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS PINE BLUFF DIVISION
Apr 5, 2013
NO. 5:12cv00461-BSM-JTR (E.D. Ark. Apr. 5, 2013)

Opinion

NO. 5:12cv00461-BSM-JTR

04-05-2013

JAMES LEE JACKSON ADC #130514 PETITIONER v. RAY HOBBS, Director, Arkansas Department of Correction RESPONDENT


ORDER

In response to Respondent's Motion to Dismiss this § 2254 action, Petitioner argues that any untimeliness should be excused because he has "newly discovered evidence" of his innocence, i.e., a notarized affidavit from an alleged eyewitness that Petitioner recently obtained "after years of searching and investigating." (Docket entry #8, at 2, 5.)

Respondent is directed to file, on or before May 6, 2013, a Reply to Petitioner's argument.

_______________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Jackson v. Hobbs

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS PINE BLUFF DIVISION
Apr 5, 2013
NO. 5:12cv00461-BSM-JTR (E.D. Ark. Apr. 5, 2013)
Case details for

Jackson v. Hobbs

Case Details

Full title:JAMES LEE JACKSON ADC #130514 PETITIONER v. RAY HOBBS, Director, Arkansas…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS PINE BLUFF DIVISION

Date published: Apr 5, 2013

Citations

NO. 5:12cv00461-BSM-JTR (E.D. Ark. Apr. 5, 2013)