Soler-Norona v. Brewer
OPINION and ORDER Modifying the 11 Order Requiring Responsive Pleading. Signed by District Judge Linda V. Parker. (RLou)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
Case No. 4:17-CV-11357
Honorable Linda V. Parker
OPINION AND ORDER MODIFYING THE
ORDER OF RESPONSIVE PLEADING
Petitioner Carlos Soler-Norona (“Petitioner) filed a petition for writ of
habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging his conviction for
conspiracy to commit armed robbery. On June 15, 2017, Magistrate Judge R.
Steven Whalen signed an Order of Responsive Pleading, requiring the respondent
to file an answer and the Rule 5 materials by November 2, 2017. (ECF No. 11.)
For the reasons that follow, the Court modifies the Order of Responsive Pleading.
The habeas corpus rules require respondents to attach the relevant portions
of the transcripts of the state court proceedings, if available, and the court may also
order, on its own motion, or upon the petitioner’s request, that further portions of
the transcripts be furnished. Griffin v. Rogers, 308 F. 3d 647, 653 (6th Cir. 2002);
Rules Governing § 2254 Cases, Rule 5, 28 U.S.C. foll. § 2254. Petitioner attached
the entire trial court record to his application for writ of habeas corpus. Petitioner
also attached various pre-trial transcripts and some appellate court materials to his
pleadings. Because Petitioner already attached these Rule 5 materials, it is
unnecessary for this Court to compel Respondent to provide the same materials
when it responds to the petition. The Order of Responsive Pleading therefore is
MODIFIED to require Respondent to file only those Rule 5 materials not
provided by Petitioner.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/ Linda V. Parker
LINDA V. PARKER
U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: June 20, 2017
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was mailed to counsel of
record and/or pro se parties on this date, June 20, 2017, by electronic and/or U.S.
First Class mail.
s/ R. Loury
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?