Cagle v. Ryan

Filing 14

ORDER to File Preliminary Response, by Magistrate Judge Gordon P. Gallagher on 3/12/2015. (slibi, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 14-cv-03401-GPG
SHAINE CARL CAGLE,
Applicant,
v.
CHARLES L. RYAN, Director, Arizona Department of Corrections, and
CYNTHIA COFFMAN, The Attorney General of the State of Colorado,
Respondents.

ORDER TO FILE PRELIMINARY RESPONSE

Applicant, Shaine Carl Cagle, is a prisoner in the custody of the Arizona
Department of Corrections and currently is incarcerated in Florence, Arizona. Mr. Cagle,
acting pro se, initiated this action by filing an Application for a Writ of Habeas Corpus
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C.§ 2241 challenging a state detainer entered against him by the
Jefferson County Sheriff’s Department regarding pending Colorado state charges against
him.
As part of the preliminary consideration of the Application in this case and pursuant
to Keck v. Hartley, 550 F. Supp. 2d 1272 (D. Colo. 2008), the Court has determined that
a limited Preliminary Response is appropriate. Respondent is directed pursuant to Rule 4
of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts to file a
Preliminary Response limited to addressing the affirmative defenses of timeliness under
28 U.S.C. § 2244(d) and/or exhaustion of state court remedies. If Respondent does not
intend to raise either of these affirmative defenses, Respondent must notify the Court of
that decision in the Preliminary Response.
Respondent may not file a dispositive motion as a Preliminary Response, or an Answer, or
otherwise address the merits of the claims in response to this Order.

In support of the Preliminary Response, Respondent should attach as exhibits all
relevant portions of the state court record, including but not limited to copies of all
documents demonstrating whether this action is filed in a timely manner and/or whether
Applicant has exhausted state court remedies.
Mr. Cagle may reply to the Preliminary Response and provide any information that
might be relevant to the one-year limitation period under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d) and/or the
exhaustion of state court remedies. Mr. Erickson also should include information relevant
to equitable tolling, specifically as to whether he has pursued his claims diligently and
whether some extraordinary circumstance prevented him from filing a timely 28 U.S.C. §
2241 action in this Court.
The Court notes that Mr. Cagle names only his custodian. The Court has included
Cynthia Coffman as a respondent in the capacity of representing counsel for the State of
Colorado. Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that within thirty days from the date of this Order Respondent shall
file a Preliminary Response that complies with this Order. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that within twenty-one days of the filing of the
Preliminary Response Applicant may file a Reply, if he desires. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that if Respondent does not intend to raise either of the
affirmative defenses of timeliness or exhaustion of state court remedies, Respondent must
notify the Court of that decision in the Preliminary Response.
Dated: March 12, 2015
BY THE COURT:

/s Gordon P. Gallagher
Gordon P. Gallagher
United States Magistrate Judge

2