FORGEY v. SUPERINTENDENT

Filing 9

ENTRY - 8 Motion for Discovery is denied without prejudice, because the motion is premature. After respondent has filed a return to the show cause order, and the issues for decision are better focused, petitioner may elect to renew his request for discovery, if appropriate. See entry for details. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 9/28/2017. (MEJ)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION
MATTHEW HERBERT FORGEY,
Petitioner,
v.
SUPERINTENDENT,
Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 1:17-cv-03029-TWP-MPB

Entry Denying Petitioner’s Motion for Discovery
Petitioner Matthew Herbert Forgey’s September 27, 2017, motion for discovery, dkt. [8],
is denied without prejudice, because the motion is premature. Respondent has entered an
appearance but the due date for his return to the show cause order has not yet passed. Without a
return, the issues for the Court to address have not yet been adequately framed.
Rule 6(a) of the Rules Governing ' 2254 Cases, 28 U.S.C. ' 2254, allows habeas corpus
petitioners to conduct civil discovery “if, and to the extent that, the judge in the exercise of his
discretion and for good cause shown grants leave to do so, but not otherwise.” See Bracy v.
Bramley, 520 U.S. 899, 904 (1997) (“A habeas petitioner, unlike the usual civil litigant in federal
court, is not entitled to discovery as a matter of ordinary course.”). In order to be entitled to
discovery, petitioner must make specific factual allegations that demonstrate that there is good
reason to believe that petitioner may, through discovery, be able to garner sufficient evidence to
entitle him to relief. See id. at 908-09.
Discovery has not been authorized in this action. Because the issues to be decided have not
yet been framed, the Court is unable to make an informed decision granting a discovery motion.
In any event, petitioner’s motion sets forth a long list of material he wants in discovery, but he

does not make specific factual allegations to demonstrate why such discovery would obtain
evidence that would entitle him to habeas corpus relief. He cites only to State of Indiana court
rules, which are inapplicable in federal court, and has not shown the need for discovery.
After respondent has filed a return to the show cause order, and the issues for decision are
better focused, petitioner may elect to renew his request for discovery, if appropriate.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

9/28/2017
Date: ____________________

Distribution:
Matthew Herbert Forgey
175408
Plainfield Correctional Facility
Electronic Service Participant – Court Only
Electronically Registered Counsel