Legere v. NH State Prison, Warden

Filing 32

ORDER Directing Clerk to Make Service. So Ordered by Judge Paul J. Barbadoro.(vln)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Christopher Legere
v.

Civil No. 10-cv-13-PB

Edward Reilly, Warden,
Northern New Hampshire
Correctional Facility 1

O R D E R
Before the court is Christopher Legere’s amended petition
for a writ of habeas corpus (doc. no. 27), filed pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 2254.

A stay entered in this action to allow the

petitioner to exhaust his claims in the state courts has now
been lifted, and the amended petition is before the court for
preliminary review.

See Rule 4, Rules Governing Section 2254

Cases in the United States District Courts (§ 2254 Rules).
Legere’s amended petition includes claims for relief, with
subparts, numbered Grounds 1–3. 2

The court finds that Legere has

demonstrated exhaustion of the claims asserted in the amended
1

The proper respondent to this action is Edward Reilly, the
warden of the Northern New Hampshire Correctional Facility,
where petitioner is presently incarcerated.
2

The grounds asserted in the amended petition (doc. no. 27)
correspond to the claims numbered 2, 3, and 5 in the court’s
January 27, 2010, order (doc. no. 6).

petition, and accordingly, that this action may proceed. 3
Conclusion
1.

The clerk’s office is directed to amend the docket in

this matter to reflect that Edward Reilly is the proper
respondent to this action.
2.

The amended petition (doc. no. 27) shall be served

upon respondent Edward Reilly, warden of the Northern New
Hampshire Correctional Facility.

The clerk’s office is directed

to serve the New Hampshire Office of the Attorney General, as
provided in the Agreement on Acceptance of Service, electronic
copies of this Order, and Legere’s amended habeas petition (doc.
no. 27), including the attachments filed with the amended
petition.
3.

Respondent shall file an answer or other pleading in

response to the allegations made in the amended petition within
3

In Legere’s original habeas petition (doc. no. 1), he
asserted six claims, numbered 1-6 in the court’s January 27,
2010, order (doc. no. 6). On June 22, 2011, the court issued an
order (doc. no. 14) adding three claims, numbered 7-9 therein,
to Legere’s habeas petition. Legere has now foregone (doc. no.
29) claims 1 and 6. In his amended petition (doc. no. 27)
Legere has not included the claims the court previously
identified as claims 4 and 7-9. If Legere intends to pursue
those claims, which appear to be exhausted, he must move to
amend the petition to add those claims to this case.
2

thirty days of service.

The answer shall comply with § 2254

Rule 5 (setting forth contents of the answer).

The respondent

shall thereafter comply with LR 7.4.
4.

Petitioner is referred to Fed. R. Civ. P. 5, which

requires that every pleading, written motion, notice, and
similar paper, after the petition, shall be served on all
parties.

Such service is to be made by mailing the material to

respondent’s attorney(s).
SO ORDERED.

/s/Paul Barbadoro
Paul Barbadoro
United States District Judge

April 21, 2014
cc:

Christopher Legere, pro se

3