KING
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A federal district court dismissed a habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. §2241 filed by a petitioner against the State of Florida, finding that the petitioner failed to exhaust state remedies and that Younger abstention doctrine barred federal jurisdiction.
The court adopted the magistrate judge's recommendation and held that the amended habeas petition should be dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust state remedies and based on Younger v. Harris abstention doctrine. The court also denied a certificate of appealability.
“The Court reviewed the issues raised in the objections de novo as required by 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3)”
Establishes the standard of review applied by the district court to the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePetitioner filed an amended habeas corpus petition in federal district court challenging some aspect of state custody or proceedings. The magistrate j…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Younger V. Harris Abstention Doctrine cases and more on FLexlaw
This case is before the Court based on the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 14) and Petitioner’s objections (Doc. 15). The Court reviewed the issues raised in the objections de novo as required by 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3), and based on that review, the Court agrees with the magistrate judge’s determination that Petitioner’s amended habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. §2241 should be dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust state remedies and based on Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971). The Court also agrees that a certificate of appealability should be denied. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that: 1. The magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation is adopted and incorporated by reference in this Order. Page 1 of 2 2. Petitioner’s amended habeas petition (Doc. 8) is DISMISSED without prejudice.
3. A certificate of appealability is DENIED.
4. The Clerk shall enter judgment in accordance with this Order and close the case file. DONE and ORDERED this Ist day of July, 2024. [...] Wood