Sickels v. Craig

Filing 4

INITIAL Review Order: The Clerk of Court directed to serve the petition on respondent and the IA Attorney General via certified mail. The respondent is directed to file an answer to Sickle's Petition in accordance with Rule 5 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases In The United States District Court by no later than February 16, 2016. Signed by Judge Mark W Bennett on 12/31/2015. Clerk mailed petition and IRO to IA Attorney General and Respondent via cert mail. (src)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA
WESTERN DIVISION
JOHN W. SICKELS,
No. C 15-4080-MWB
Petitioner,
vs.
DAN CRAIG,

INITIAL REVIEW ORDER AND
ORDER DIRECTING SERVICE OF
PETITIONER’S § 2254 PETITION

Respondent.
___________________________
This case comes before me on the Clerk of Court’s periodic review of the status
of cases. It appears that petitioner John W. Sickels filed his Petition Under § 2254 For
Writ Of Habeas Corpus (docket no. 1), through counsel, on September 18, 2015, in the
Southern District of Iowa. At the time of filing, Sickels paid the filing fee of $5. By
Order (docket no. 2), filed on September 24, 2015, this case was transferred to this
District pursuant to an agreement between the federal courts in this state concerning the
district in which such cases shall be heard. The transfer apparently did not trigger the
court’s initial review of the Petition pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section
2254 Cases In The United States District Court, which is required in every § 2254 case,
even in the absence of an application to proceed in forma pauperis. Consequently, it
appears that the Petition has never been served. I have now examined Sickels’s Petition,
and I cannot say that it plainly appears from the Petition that Sickels is not entitled to
relief in the district court, so I will direct that it be served on the respondent. Rule 4,
Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases In The United States District Court.

THEREFORE,
1.

The Clerk of Court is directed to send a copy of Sickels’s Petition and a

copy of this Order by certified mail to the respondent and the Iowa Attorney General in
accordance with Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases In The United States
District Court; and
2.

The respondent is directed to file an answer to Sickels’s Petition in

accordance with Rule 5 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases In The United States
District Court by no later than February 16, 2016.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this 31st day of December, 2015.

______________________________________
MARK W. BENNETT
U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA

2