Mufid Al-Din, Also Known as Charles A. Parker v. Michael Bowersox

Eighth Circuit

Mufid Al-Din, Also Known as Charles A. Parker v. Michael Bowersox

176 F.3d 1043, 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 7280, 1999 WL 203817

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit·Decided April 13, 1999·No. 97-3598·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinions

McMILLIAN, Circuit Judge.

Respondent Michael Bowersox appeals from an order entered in the United States District Court² for the Western District of Missouri denying his motion to dismiss Mufid A-Din’s petition for writ of habeas corpus as untimely filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1). Parker v. Bowersox, 975 F.Supp. 1251 (W.D.Mo.1997) (order denying respondent’s motion to dismiss and granting respondent’s motion for an interlocutory appeal). Jurisdiction in the district court was based upon 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 2254. Jurisdiction in this court is based upon 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b). In an earlier proceeding, a divided panel of this court affirmed. We subsequently vacated the panel opinion and granted respondent’s suggestion for rehearing en banc. Now, in accordance with our en banc opinion filed on this date in the consolidated cases under the title Nichols v. Bowersox, 172 F.3d 1068 (8th Cir.1999) (en banc), we affirm the order of the district court denying respondent’s motion to dismiss. See 8th Cir.R. 47B.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

McMILLIAN, Circuit Judge.

Respondent Michael Bowersox appeals from an order entered in the United States District Court² for the Western District of Missouri denying his motion to dismiss Mufid A-Din’s petition for writ of habeas corpus as untimely filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1). Parker v. Bowersox, 975 F.Supp. 1251 (W.D.Mo.1997) (order denying respondent’s motion to dismiss and granting respondent’s motion for an interlocutory appeal). Jurisdiction in the district court was based upon 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 2254. Jurisdiction in this court is based upon 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b). In an earlier proceeding, a divided panel of this court affirmed. We subsequently vacated the panel opinion and granted respondent’s suggestion for rehearing en banc. Now, in accordance with our en banc opinion filed on this date in the consolidated cases under the title Nichols v. Bowersox, 172 F.3d 1068 (8th Cir.1999) (en banc), we affirm the order of the district court denying respondent’s motion to dismiss. See 8th Cir.R. 47B.

Mufid Al-Din, Also Known as Charles A. Parker v. Michael Bowersox, 176 F.3d 1043, 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 7280, 1999 WL 203817 (8th Cir. 1999).

Pincite

176 F.3d 1043 (Mufid Al-Din, Also Known as Charles A. Parker v. Michael Bowersox) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinions

Related