Jones v. Cassady
Filing
5
OPINION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER re: 1 ORDERED that the Clerk shall administratively terminate this case. FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall file the petition for writ of habeas corpus as a motion for leave to file an amended petition in Jones v. Bernsen, 4:12CV343 HEA (E.D. Mo.). Case Termed. Signed by District Judge Henry E. Autrey on 11/25/13. (CEL)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
WILLIAM JONES,
Petitioner,
v.
JAY CASSADY,
Respondent.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. 4:13CV2278 HEA
OPINION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on review of petitioner’s petition for writ of
habeas pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The petition is duplicative of a another petition
that is pending before the Court.
Petitioner filed his original petition for writ of habeas corpus on December 16,
2011. Jones v. Bernsen, 4:12CV343 HEA (E.D. Mo.). He challenges a conviction
for assault. Petitioner filed the instant petition, which challenges the same judgment,
on October 3, 2013, in the United States District Court for the Western District of
Missouri. That Court transferred the case to this Court on November 13, 2013.
In general, when a petitioner files a duplicative habeas petition before
adjudication of an initial petition is complete, the Court should construe the second
petition as a motion to amend the first petition. E.g., Whab v. United States, 408 F.3d
116, 119 (2d Cir. 2005). As a result, the Court will administratively terminate the
instant case and will order the Clerk to file the petition as a motion for leave to amend
in the original case.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk shall administratively terminate
this case.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall file the petition for writ of
habeas corpus as a motion for leave to file an amended petition in Jones v. Bernsen,
4:12CV343 HEA (E.D. Mo.).
Dated this 25th day of November, 2013.
HENRY EDWARD AUTREY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
-2-
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?