Hudgens v. Romanowski
OPINION AND ORDER granting 9 Motion to Dismiss Habeas Without Prejudice. Signed by District Judge Sean F. Cox. (JMcC)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
CASE NO. 12-15523
HONORABLE SEAN F. COX
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER’S MOTION TO DISMISS, AND
DISMISSING WITHOUT PREJUDICE THE PETITION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS
CORPUS [DKT. 9]
Petitioner George Hudgens filed a motion to voluntarily dismiss his pending petition for a
writ of habeas corpus on February 20, 2013. Petitioner seeks an opportunity to return to the state
courts to pursue additional challenges to his state criminal proceedings. The Court previously denied
Petitioner's motion to stay this proceeding so that he could exhaust additional claims in the state
courts. The Court noted that less than two months expired on the one-year statute of limitations. As
a result, Petitioner will have time to file a federal habeas petition after exhausting additional claims
in state court. Petitioner indicates in the current motion that he has elected to voluntarily dismiss this
proceeding to exhaust additional claims.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Petitionerisabella8’s motion to dismiss is GRANTED and
the petition for a writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. This order closes
this case. Should Petitioner wish to seek federal habeas relief following the exhaustion of state court
remedies, he must file a new habeas petition in federal court within the time remaining on the
one-year period of limitations.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: March 4, 2013
S/ Sean F. Cox
Sean F. Cox
U. S. District Court Judge
I hereby certify that on March 4, 2013, the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record
by electronic means and upon George Hudgens by First Class Mail at the address below:
Macomb Correctional Facility
34625 26 Mile Road
New Haven, MI 48048
Dated: March 4, 2013
S/ J. McCoy
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?