Williams v. Earls

Filing 4

OPINION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER re: 2 ORDERED that petitioner's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis [Doc. #2] is GRANTED. FURTHER ORDERED that no order to show cause shall issue at this time as to respondent, because it appears that peti tioner did not exhaust available state remedies before invoking federal habeas corpus jurisdiction. FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner shall show cause within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order as to why the Court should not dismiss the instant petition for failure to exhaust available state remedies. Petitioner's failure to file a show cause response shall result in the denial of the instant habeas corpus petition and the dismissal of this action, without prejudice. ( Show Cause Response due by 1/7/2012.). Signed by Honorable Henry E. Autrey on 12/7/11. (CEL)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION

CRAIG D. WILLIAMS,
Petitioner,
vs.
ALAN EARLS,
Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 4:11-CV-1985-FRB

OPINION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court upon the application of Craig D. Williams for leave to
commence this action without payment of the required filing fee [Doc. #2]. Upon consideration of
the financial information provided with the application, the Court finds that petitioner is financially
unable to pay any portion of the filing fee.
The Petition
Petitioner seeks a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner states that
following his conviction in the Circuit Court of Audrain County in Mexico, Missouri, he was placed
on probation. His probation subsequently was revoked on July 5, 2011. In the instant action,
petitioner is challenging the revocation of his probation on the grounds of ineffective assistance of
counsel and the violation of his due process rights. Petitioner states that he “is using this petition
for a state remedy.”
Discussion
In the absence of exceptional circumstances, a state prisoner must exhaust currently available
and adequate state remedies before invoking federal habeas corpus jurisdiction. Braden v. 30th
Judicial Circuit Court of Kentucky, 410 U.S. 484 (1973). State remedies are ordinarily not
considered exhausted if an individual may effectively present his claim to the state courts by any

currently available and adequate procedure. The State of Missouri provides habeas corpus relief for
prisoners in its custody. See Rev. Mo. Stat. § 532.010 (1994), Missouri Supreme Court Rule 91.01.
As such, it appears that petitioner has available procedures that he must exhaust.
Therefore,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis
[Doc. #2] is GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that no order to show cause shall issue at this time as to
respondent, because it appears that petitioner did not exhaust available state remedies before
invoking federal habeas corpus jurisdiction.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner shall show cause within thirty (30) days of
the date of this Order as to why the Court should not dismiss the instant petition for failure to
exhaust available state remedies. Petitioner’s failure to file a show cause response shall result in the
denial of the instant habeas corpus petition and the dismissal of this action, without prejudice.
Dated this 7th day of December, 2011

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2