McEwen v. Bowersox

Filing 19

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion of respondent Michael S. Bowersox for a more definite statement (Doc. 16 ) is denied as moot. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion of respondent Michael S. Bowersox for an extension of tim e for response (Doc. 16) is sustained. Respondent Michael S. Bowersox must file a response to the amended petition by November 1, 2013. ( Response to Court due by 11/1/2013.). Signed by Magistrate Judge David D. Noce on 9/18/13. (KKS) (Main Document 19 replaced on 9/18/2013) (KKS).

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
LARRY A. McEWEN,
Petitioner,
v.
MICHAEL S. BOWERSOX,
Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 4:12 CV 2293 DDN

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This action is before the court on the motion of respondent Michael S. Bowersox for a
more definite statement and for an extension of time for response. (Doc. 16.) The parties have
consented to the exercise of plenary authority by the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). (Doc. 13.)
On December 7, 2012, pro se petitioner Larry A. McEwen commenced this federal
habeas action under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, asserting that he received ineffective assistance of counsel
at the trial, appellate, post-conviction, and appellate post-conviction levels.

(Doc. 1.)

Respondent Michael S. Bowersox moves for a more definite statement, noting that rather than
setting forth the grounds in a narrative manner, petitioner merely refers to attached exhibits
without further designating whose error each of the cited materials are intended to support.
(Doc. 16.) “[A] petitioner must state specific, particularized facts which entitle him or her to
habeas corpus relief for each ground specified.” Adams v. Armontrout, 897 F.2d 332, 334 (8th
Cir. 1990).
On August 2, 2013, petitioner amended his petition with the assistance of counsel. (Doc.
18.) Because the amended petition appears to address the concerns raised in respondent’s
motion for a more definite statement, that motion is denied as moot.
Respondent also moves for a forty-five day extension of time respond to the order to
show cause, which petitioner does not contest.
For the reasons stated above,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion of respondent Michael S. Bowersox for a
more definite statement (Doc. 16) is denied as moot.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion of respondent Michael S. Bowersox for
an extension of time for response (Doc. 16) is sustained. Respondent Michael S. Bowersox must
file a response to the amended petition not later than November 1, 2013.

/S/ David D. Noce
l
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Signed on September 18, 2013.

-2