SNOW v. ZATECKY

Filing 7

Entry Again Directing Further Proceedings - The motion to amend [dkt 6] is denied because it does not comply with direction issued in the Entry of November 9, 2015 and because it does not otherwise assert a viable basis on which he could be awarded the relief he seeks in this action. He shall have a further period of time, through January 6, 2016, in which to supplement his petition for writ of habeas corpus as directed in the Entry of November 9, 2015. Copy to Petitioner via U.S. Mail. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 12/9/2015. (JLS)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION
KERRY SNOW,
Petitioner,
v.
DUSHAN ZATECKY,
Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No: 1:15-cv-01750-TWP-TAB

Entry Again Directing Further Proceedings
I.
Kerry Snow seeks a writ of habeas corpus invalidating his 2009 Howard County conviction
of dealing in cocaine. Snow was given through December 1, 2015 in which to do the following:
First, he was to identify which of his habeas claims were decided on the merits in the Indiana state
courts. Second, he was to explain as to each such claim whether and in what way the state court’s
decision was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal
law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States, or was based on an unreasonable
determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the State court proceedings.
Snow has responded to the foregoing directions with his motion to amend, wherein he
attempts to explain that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel and that his trial was
rendered unfair because of tainted identification procedures. However, the motion to amend does
not identify which of his habeas claims were decided on the merits in the Indiana state courts.
Further, the motion to amend does not explain whether and how the decision of the Indiana state
courts on any claim which has been asserted in his habeas petition is deficient under the standard
which was given to him. Accordingly, the motion to amend [dkt 6] is denied because it does not

comply with direction issued in the Entry of November 9, 2015 and because it does not otherwise
assert a viable basis on which he could be awarded the relief he seeks in this action.
II.
Snow seeks a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a). A federal court may
grant habeas relief only if the petitioner demonstrates that he is in custody "in violation of the
Constitution or laws . . . of the United States." 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a) (1996).
“By its terms § 2254(d) bars relitigation of any claim 'adjudicated on the merits' in state
court, subject only to the exceptions in §§ 2254(d)(1) and (d)(2).” Harrington v. Richter, 562 U.S.
86, 98 (2011). The three exceptions are: (1) the state court's decision was contrary to clearly
established federal law; or (2) there was an unreasonable application of clearly established federal
law; or (3) the decision was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts. Id. at 100 (citing
28 U.S.C. §§ 2254(d)(1), (2)); see also O'Quinn v. Spiller, No. 14-1836, 2015 WL 7568443, at *1
(7th Cir. Nov. 25, 2015)(“We ask only whether the [state court’s] decision was ‘contrary to, or
involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the
Supreme Court of the United States,’ or ‘was based on an unreasonable determination of facts in
light of the evidence presented in the State court proceeding.’”)(quoting 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1),
(2). This means, among other things, that “under AEDPA, federal courts do not independently
analyze the petitioner’s claims; federal courts are limited to reviewing the relevant state court
ruling on the claims.” Rever v. Acevedo, 590 F.3d 533, 536 (7th Cir. 2010). As one court has
explained, “[i]t is this Court’s obligation to focus “on the state court decision that previously
addressed the claims rather than the petitioner’s freestanding claims themselves.” McLee v.
Angelone, 967 F.Supp. 152, 156 (E.D.Va. 1997).

Snow has offered freestanding claims. This will not do. He shall have a further period of
time, through January 6, 2016, in which to supplement his petition for writ of habeas corpus as
directed in the Entry of November 9, 2015.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

Date: 12/9/2015

Distribution:
KERRY SNOW
911130
PENDLETON - CIF
CORRECTIONAL INDUSTRIAL FACILITY
Inmate Mail/Parcels
5124 West Reformatory Road
PENDLETON, IN 46064