Bryant v. Attorney General of the State of Michigan

Filing 12

ORDER denying Petitioner's 11 Motion for Relief from Judgment. Signed by District Judge Gerald E. Rosen. (JOwe)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION TERENCE STEVEN BRYANT, Petitioner, vs. No. 12-cv-15666 Hon. Gerald E. Rosen RANDAL HAAS, Warden, Respondent. _____________________________/ ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT At a session of said Court, held in the U.S. Courthouse, Detroit, Michigan on July 13 2015 PRESENT: Honorable Gerald E. Rosen United States District Chief Judge This matter is presently before the Court on the Motion for Relief from Judgment filed by habeas corpus petitioner Terence Steven Bryant. The Court transferred Bryant’s habeas corpus petition as a second or successive petition to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals on January 14, 2013 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A). The Sixth Circuit denied Bryant permission to file a second or successive petition on August 9, 2013. As Petitioner’s second or successive petition was transferred to the Court of Appeals, no Judgment was ever entered by this Court. And, as this Court is inferior to the Circuit Court of Appeals, it has no jurisdiction to grant relief from the orders or judgments of that court. If Petitioner wishes to obtain relief from the Sixth Circuit’s decision, a motion for relief from judgment should be directed to the Court of Appeals. For these reasons, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motion for Relief from Judgment [Dkt. # 11] is DENIED. s/Gerald E. Rosen Chief Judge, United States District Court Dated: July 13, 2015 I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the parties and/or counsel of record on July 13, 2015, by electronic and/or ordinary mail. s/Julie Owens Case Manager, (313) 234-5135

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?