From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rutledge v. Neilsen

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHERN DIVISION
Aug 31, 2012
CASE NO. 2:10-cv-0242-TMH (M.D. Ala. Aug. 31, 2012)

Summary

holding that allegations relating to the sufficiency of or weight afforded evidence do not constitute "new reliable evidence" regarding petitioner's actual innocence

Summary of this case from Pitts v. Davenport

Opinion

CASE NO. 2:10-cv-0242-TMH

08-31-2012

JONATHAN LOUIS RUTLEDGE, Petitioner, v. ROBERT NEILSEN, et al., Respondents.


WO


FINAL JUDGMENT

Upon consideration of the prior proceedings, opinions and orders entered in this case, it is

ORDERED and ADJUDGED that judgment is entered in favor of the respondents and against the petitioner and that this action is dismissed with prejudice.

The clerk of the court is directed to enter this document on the civil docket as a final judgment pursuant to Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

_________________

TRUMAN M. HOBBS

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Rutledge v. Neilsen

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHERN DIVISION
Aug 31, 2012
CASE NO. 2:10-cv-0242-TMH (M.D. Ala. Aug. 31, 2012)

holding that allegations relating to the sufficiency of or weight afforded evidence do not constitute "new reliable evidence" regarding petitioner's actual innocence

Summary of this case from Pitts v. Davenport
Case details for

Rutledge v. Neilsen

Case Details

Full title:JONATHAN LOUIS RUTLEDGE, Petitioner, v. ROBERT NEILSEN, et al.…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHERN DIVISION

Date published: Aug 31, 2012

Citations

CASE NO. 2:10-cv-0242-TMH (M.D. Ala. Aug. 31, 2012)

Citing Cases

Reese v. United States

Allegations regarding the sufficiency of and/or weight afforded the evidence do not constitute "new reliable…

Pitts v. Davenport

Such arguments, predicated on Pitts's interpretation of the import of evidence presented at trial, will not…