SMITH v. STATE OF FLORIDA et al

Filing 11

ORDER re Petitioners 6 Motion To Introduce Importance of Law, For Constitutional Rights; 7 Motion To Introduce State Remedies Exhausted;and 8 Motion To Introduce Witness List Subpoenas Prohibited to Speak At Hearing are GRANT ED to the limited extent that the Court, if necessary, will consider the matters raised in the motions in ruling upon petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §2254. Signed by MAGISTRATE JUDGE GARY R JONES on 1/30/2012. (jws)

Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
GAINESVILLE DIVISION
TED SMITH,
Petitioner,
v.

CASE NO. 1:11-cv-265-MP-GRJ

WILLIAM S. BAXTER,
NFETC Administrator,
and FRANK E. SHEFFIELD,
Circuit Judge, Gadsden County,
Respondents.
_____________________________/
ORDER
Pending before the Court are: (1) Petitioner’s Motion To Introduce Importance of
Law, For “Constitutional Rights” (Doc. 6); (2) Petitioner’s Motion To Introduce “State
Remedies Exhausted” (Doc. 7); and (3) Petitioner’s Motion To Introduce Petitioner’s
Witness List “Subpoenas” Prohibited to Speak At Hearing. (Doc. 8.) Petitioner’s motions
fail to request specific relief from the Court. Rather, the motions simply attempt to bring
to the attention of the court matters that may have occurred during the course of state
proceedings. To this extent that any of these matters are relevant to the Court’s
determination of Plaintiff’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
2254, the motions are granted to the extent the court will take note of these matters if
necessary in ruling upon Petitioner’s habeas corpus petition.
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that:
Petitioner’s Motion To Introduce Importance of Law, For “Constitutional Rights”
(Doc. 6); Petitioner’s Motion To Introduce “State Remedies Exhausted” (Doc. 7);
and Petitioner’s Motion To Introduce Petitioner’s Witness List “Subpoenas”
Prohibited to Speak At Hearing (Doc. 8) are GRANTED to the limited extent that

Page 2 of 2

the Court, if necessary, will consider the matters raised in the motions in ruling
upon Petitioner’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
2254.
DONE AND ORDERED this 30th day of January 2012.

s/ Gary R. Jones s/GaryR.Jone
GARY R. JONES
United States Magistrate Judge

Case No: 1:11-cv-265-MP-GRJ