Shananaquet v. Stewart

Filing 3

OPINION AND ORDER dismissing 1 Petition for writ of habeas corpus as duplicative, directing that the habeas petition be filed in a prior case (16-13357), denying a certificate of appealability, and denying leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. Signed by District Judge George Caram Steeh. (DPer)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION

DAKOTA SHANANAQUET, #543751,
Petitioner,
v.

CASE NO. 2:18-CV-11552
HON. GEORGE CARAM STEEH

ANTHONY STEWART,
Respondent.
________________________________/
OPINION AND ORDER DISMISSING THE HABEAS CASE AS
DUPLICATIVE, DIRECTING THAT THE HABEAS PETITION BE
FILED IN A PRIOR CASE, DENYING A CERTIFICATE
OF APPEALABILITY, AND DENYING LEAVE TO PROCEED
IN FORMA PAUPERIS ON APPEAL
Michigan prisoner Dakota Shananaquet (“petitioner”) has filed a pro
se petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254
asserting that she is being held in violation of her constitutional rights. In
her pleadings, she challenges Emmet County Circuit Court convictions for
three counts of perjury, possession of a financial transaction device,
larceny from a motor vehicle, and false report of a felony for which she was
sentenced as a habitual offender to concurrent terms of 7 to 20 years
imprisonment, 1 year 4 months to 8 years imprisonment, 1 year 4 months
-1-

to 10 years imprisonment, and 4 to 6 years imprisonment, respectively, in
2013.
The petitioner, however, has already filed a federal habeas action
challenging the same convictions and sentences which is pending in
federal court. See Shananaquet v. Stewart, Case No. 2:16-CV-13357
(E.D. Mich.) (Goldsmith, J.). In that case, Judge Goldsmith stayed and
administratively closed the case so that the petitioner could return to the
state courts to exhaust state remedies as to additional claims. The
petitioner was instructed to move to re-open that case to proceed on an
amended petition upon completion of her state court remedies. Rather
than doing so, the petitioner filed the instant petition.
The instant action must be dismissed as duplicative and/or
successive to the petitioner’s stayed habeas petition. See, e.g., Flowers v.
Trombley, 2006 WL 724594, *1 (E.D. Mich. March 17, 2006) Harrington v.
Stegall, 2002 WL 373113, *2 (E.D. Mich. Feb. 28, 2002); see also Davis v.
United States Parole Comm’n, 870 F.2d 657, 1989 WL 25837, *1 (6th Cir.
March 7, 1989) (district court may dismiss habeas petition as duplicative of
pending habeas petition when second petition is essentially same as first
petition). The petitioner’s pleadings should be submitted in her previously-

-2-

filed case. The petitioner may not challenge the same convictions in two
different habeas actions. Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES this case
without prejudice. The Court DIRECTS the Clerk’s Office to re-file the
instant petition in Case No. 2:16-CV-13357 for further consideration. The
Court makes no determination as to the merits of the habeas petition. This
case is closed.
Before the petitioner may appeal, a certificate of appealability must
issue. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(a); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b). A certificate
of appealability may issue only if a petitioner makes “a substantial showing
of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). When a
court denies relief on procedural grounds without addressing the merits, a
certificate of appealability should issue if it is shown that jurists of reason
would find it debatable whether the petitioner states a valid claim of the
denial of a constitutional right, and that jurists of reason would find it
debatable whether the court was correct in its procedural ruling. Slack v.
McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484-85 (2000). Reasonable jurists could not
debate the correctness of the Court’s procedural ruling. Accordingly, the
Court DENIES a certificate of appealability. The Court also DENIES leave
to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal as any appeal from this non-

-3-

prejudicial dismissal would be frivolous and cannot be take in good faith.
See Fed. R. App. P. 24(a).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/George Caram Steeh
HON. GEORGE CARAM STEEH
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: May 24, 2018
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
Copies of this Order were served upon attorneys of record on
May 24, 2018, by electronic and/or ordinary mail and also on
Dakota Shananaquet #54375, Huron Valley Complex Womens, 3201 Bemis Road, Ypsilanti, MI 48197.
s/Barbara Radke
Deputy Clerk

-4-