Williams v. Michigan, State of
ORDER Directing Respondent to File Supplemental Rule 5 Materials. Signed by District Judge Matthew F. Leitman. (HMon)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
HENRY L. WILLIAMS,
Case No. 16-cv-12820
Hon. Matthew F. Leitman
CATHERINE S. BAUMAN,
ORDER DIRECTING RESPONDENT
TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL RULE 5 MATERIALS
This matter has come before the Court on petitioner Henry L. Williams’ pro
se application for the writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The petition
challenges Williams’ plea-based convictions for armed robbery, conspiracy to
commit armed robbery, and conspiracy to commit first-degree home invasion.
Williams asserts that (1) the trial court abused its discretion in failing to abide by
the Cobbs1 evaluation at sentencing and by not sentencing him within the
minimum sentencing guidelines range, (2-3) the trial court abused its discretion
when scoring four offense variables of the Michigan sentencing guidelines, and (4)
he should be allowed to withdraw his guilty plea because it was involuntary and
See People v. Cobbs, 443 Mich. 276; 505 N.W.2d 208 (1993).
based on erroneous advice from counsel. The State has moved to dismiss the
Petition on grounds that Williams failed to exhaust state remedies for all his claims
and that the claims are moot because Williams appears to have received the relief
To fairly address the allegations in the Petition, the Court needs
additional materials from the state court record.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT the State shall file (1) the transcript
of the July 22, 2015, hearing on Williams’ motion to withdraw his guilty plea or
for re-sentencing, and (2) the transcript of Petitioner’s re-sentencing, held on July
29, 2015. If transcripts for these hearings currently do not exist, the Court orders
that the proceedings held on July 22, 2015, and July 29, 2015, be transcribed and
furnished to the Court pursuant to Rule 5(c) of the Rules Governing Section 2254
Cases in the United States District Courts. The deadline for filing these materials
or an explanation why the items cannot be filed is August 21, 2017. Following
receipt of the requested items, the Court will address the State’s motion to dismiss
the Petition without further notice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Matthew F. Leitman
MATTHEW F. LEITMAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: August 2, 2017
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the
parties and/or counsel of record on August 2, 2017, by electronic means and/or
s/Holly A. Monda
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?