Sean Carter v. Margaret Bradshaw


Per Curiam OPINION filed : VACATED and REMANDED, decision not for publication. Boyce F. Martin , Jr., R. Guy Cole , Jr., and John M. Rogers, Circuit Judges.

Download PDF
Case: 08-4377 Document: 006111660167 Filed: 04/18/2013 Page: 1 NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION File Name: 13a0386n.06 No. 08-4377 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT FILED Apr 18, 2013 DEBORAH S. HUNT, Clerk SEAN CARTER, Petitioner-Appellee, v. TERRY TIBBALS, Respondent-Appellant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO BEFORE: MARTIN, COLE, and ROGERS, Circuit Judges PER CURIAM. In this case the district court, finding that habeas petitioner Carter was not competent to assist counsel, dismissed Carter’s habeas petition without prejudice. On appeal, we amended the district court’s judgment to order instead that Carter’s petition be stayed indefinitely with respect to any claims that required his assistance. The Supreme Court granted certiorari, held that there is no right for a petitioner to be competent during federal habeas proceedings, vacated our judgment, and remanded for further proceedings. Tibbals v. Carter, 133 S. Ct. 696 (2013). The Court determined that the district court should have denied a stay with respect to three claims adjudicated on the merits in state postconviction proceedings. Id. at 709. The Court also held that a fourth claim, if both unexhausted and not procedurally defaulted, would not warrant an indefinite stay, but might warrant a stay if the “claim could substantially benefit from the petitioner’s Case: 08-4377 Document: 006111660167 Filed: 04/18/2013 Page: 2 assistance,” taking “into account the likelihood that the petitioner will regain competence in the foreseeable future.” Id. We vacate the order of the district court and remand for further proceedings consistent with the Supreme Court’s opinion.

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?