Morales v. Chapalaine et al
PRISCS- RULING Denying 6 MOTION for impartial Investigator filed by Alex Morales Signed by Judge Alvin W. Thompson on 5/13/2013.(Payton, R.)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT
CHAPDELAINE, et al.
Case No. 3:13cv531(AWT)
RULING ON MOTION TO APPOINT IMPARTIAL INVESTIGATOR [Doc. #6]
The petitioner has filed a motion asking the court to
appoint the Honorable Holly B. Fitzsimmons, U.S.M.J., to
impartially investigate the claims in his habeas petition.
The court has issued an order to show cause directing the
state to respond to the plaintiff’s claims of mistaken identity.
The time for the response has not yet expired.
In preparing the
response, the state necessarily will investigate the claims.
When reviewing a federal petition for writ of habeas corpus,
the court is restricted to reviewing the state court proceedings
to determine whether the state court decisions:
(1) resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or
involved an unreasonable application of, clearly
established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme
Court of the United States; or
(2) resulted in a decision that was based on an
unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the
evidence presented in the State court proceeding.
28 U.S.C. § 2254(d).
The statute does not authorize the court to
appoint an independent investigator to review the claims.
The plaintiff cites two cases in support of his motion.
first is a 1999 Second Circuit case, Porter v. Singletary.
Research reveals no case decided in the Second Circuit with that
The second, Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254 (1970),
concerns the right to a hearing before termination of public
The case does not support the request for
the court to appoint an independent investigator to consider the
claims in the habeas petition.
The plaintiff’s motion [Doc. #6] is hereby DENIED.
It is so ordered.
Dated this 13th day of May 2013 at Hartford, Connecticut.
Alvin W. Thompson
United States District Judge
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?