Nitz v. Hulick

Filing 91

ORDER. For the reasons stated in the attached Order, the parties are DIRECTED to file a joint status report by August 5, 2022 detailing their respective positions on the status of the stay in this matter. (Status Report due by 8/5/2022). Signed by Judge David W. Dugan on 8/1/2022. (arm)

Download PDF
Case 3:07-cv-00520-DWD Document 91 Filed 08/01/22 Page 1 of 3 Page ID #254 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS RICHARD C. NITZ, Petitioner, vs. CHRISTINE BRANNON, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 07-cv-520-DWD ORDER DUGAN, District Judge: On July 20, 2007, Petitioner Richard C. Nitz, through counsel, filed his Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus seeking relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 to challenge the conditions of his confinement (Doc. 2). Petitioner argues that he was denied the opportunity to an impartial jury during the retrial of his Illinois state charge for first degree murder. Petitioner filed an amended petition on December 12, 2007 (Doc. 21), adding a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. On January 9, 2008, this case was stayed to allow Petitioner to exhaust his state court remedies (Doc. 23). On April 25, 2008, the Court denied Respondent’s motion to reconsider the imposition of the stay and directed Petitioner to file a motion to lift the stay in this matter within 30-days of the conclusion of his state court proceedings (Doc. 33). Thereafter, the parties were directed to file status reports concerning Petitioner’s state court proceedings. This case was reassigned to the undersigned in October 2020 (Doc. 75). At that time, Petitioner was in the process of appealing the state court’s denial of his 1 Case 3:07-cv-00520-DWD Document 91 Filed 08/01/22 Page 2 of 3 Page ID #255 postconviction petition following a limited order of remand (Doc. 77). On January 4, 2022, the Illinois appellate court denied Petitioner’s petition for rehearing (Doc. 85) and Petitioner filed a petition for leave to appeal with the Illinois Supreme Court (Doc. 87). On March 16, 2022, the Court directed the parties to file a status report concerning the stay of proceedings “within 7-days of the disposition of Petitioner’s petition for leave to appeal, or by June 15, 2022, whichever is earlier.” (Doc. 90). The parties did not file a status report by the June 15, 2022 deadline. Moreover, a review of the Illinois Supreme Court’s leave to appeal docket indicates that Petitioner’s petition for leave to appeal was denied on March 31, 2022. 1 In its entirety, the disposition provides: THE FOLLOWING CASES ON THE LEAVE TO APPEAL DOCKET WERE DISPOSED OF AS INDICIATED: 128058 - People State of Illinois, respondent, v. Richard C. Nitz, petitioner. Leave to appeal, Appellate Court, Fifth District. 5-19-0320 Petition for Leave to Appeal Denied. Despite the denial of Petitioner’s petition for leave to appeal, neither party has filed a status report with the Court. Moreover, at this time, it appears that the stay of proceedings is due to be lifted. However, Petitioner has not filed a motion to lift the stay of these proceedings. The Court observes that Petitioner still appears to be represented by Counsel in this matter. On July 17, 2007, Attorney Aviva Futorian entered her appearance for 1See Illinois Supreme Court Order dated March 30, 2022, disposing of cases on the leave to appeal docket, available at https://ilcourtsaudio.blob.core.windows.net/antilles-resources/resources/d733341a-023f4377-b84d-d755a23a39cc/033022.pdf (last visited Aug. 1, 2022). 2 Case 3:07-cv-00520-DWD Document 91 Filed 08/01/22 Page 3 of 3 Page ID #256 Petitioner (Doc. 4). No motion for leave to withdraw has been filed, and electronic notices continue to be sent to Attorney Futorian. Accordingly, the Court DIRECTS the parties to file a joint status report by August 5, 2022 detailing their respective positions on the status of the stay in this matter. SO ORDERED. Dated: August 1, 2022 _____________________________ DAVID W. DUGAN United States District Judge 3

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?