PALMER v. COUNTRYMAN
4:24-cv-00159
M.D. Ga.Apr 14, 2025Background
- Adrian L. Palmer, an inmate at Muscogee County Jail, filed a pro se pleading that was docketed as a § 2254 habeas petition.
- On December 18, 2024, the court ordered Palmer to pay the filing fee or apply for in forma pauperis status and to recast his petition on the correct form within 14 days.
- Palmer failed to respond or comply with these directives.
- On March 3, 2025, the court issued a show cause order, again requiring Palmer to comply within 14 days, warning that failure could result in dismissal.
- Palmer again did not respond or take any action.
- The court dismissed Palmer’s petition without prejudice for failure to prosecute and comply with court orders, and denied a certificate of appealability (COA).
Issues
| Issue | Palmer's Argument | Countryman's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Failure to comply with court orders | No response or argument presented | Enforce compliance with court orders | Dismissed petition without prejudice |
| Entitlement to certificate of appealability | No response or argument presented | COA should not be granted | COA denied |
| Diligent prosecution of claims | No evidence of prosecution | No further prosecution shown by Palmer | Dismissal for want of prosecution appropriate |
| Correct procedural posture for dismissal | No position stated | Dismissal proper under Rule 41 and Habeas Rules | Court has authority to dismiss under Rule 41(b) |
Key Cases Cited
- Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473 (2000) (sets standard for COA where habeas petitions are denied on procedural grounds)
- Alexander v. Johnson, 211 F.3d 895 (5th Cir. 2000) (approves denial of COA before notice of appeal is filed)
- Knox v. Morgan, 457 F. App’x 777 (10th Cir. 2012) (dismissal for failure to comply with court orders is proper in habeas cases)