TIGGS v. JOHNSON et al

Filing 17

MEMORANDUM/ORDER granting 16 Motion for Extension of Time to File a reply in support ofhis habeas petition on or before 7/5/16; that petitioners request for the respondent to provide a physical hard copy of the judges written jury instructions (Dkt. No. 14) is denied without prejudice. Signed by Judge Kevin McNulty on 5/10/16. N/M (DD, )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

ARTHUR ‘rIGGS,
Civ. No. 15-8664 (KM)

Petitioner,
V.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

STEVEN JOHNSON, et al.,
Respondents.

The petitioner, Arthur Tiggs, is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ
of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 2254. Respondent filed an answer to the habeas petition

on March 18, 2016, thereby giving petitioner until May 2, 2016, to file a reply. Presently pending
before this Court is Mr. Tiggs’s motion for an extension of time to file such a reply. (See Dkt.
No. 16) Good cause being shown, Mr. Tiggs’ motion for an extension of time shall be granted.
He shall have until July 5, 2016 to file his reply in support of his habeas petition.
Mr. Tiggs has also filed a request to have the respondent “complete the record” by
providing this Court and himself with a physical hard copy of the trial judge’s written jury
instructions. (See Dkt. No. 14) Respondent opposes this request. (See Dkt. No. 15)
It is true that some of Mr. ‘riggs’ claims involve the trial judge’s jury instructions.
Nevertheless, respondent attached to its response to the habeas petition a full complete copy of
the oral jury instructions that the trial judge gave the jury as included within the trial transcript.
(See Dkt. No. 9-33) Mr. Tiggs does not explain why this filing by the respondent is insufficient.
Accordingly, this Court will deny Mr. Tiggs’s request for a physical hard copy of the trial
judge’s written jury instructions without prejudice.
Therefore, IT IS this 10th day of May, 2016,

ORDERED that petitioner’s motion for an extension of time to file a reply in support of
his habeas petition (Dkt. No. 16) is granted, and that petitioner may file his reply on or before
July 5, 2016; and it is further
ORDERED that petitioner’s request for the respondent to provide a physical hard copy of
the judge’s written jury instructions (Dkt. No. 14) is denied without prejudice; and it is further
ORDERED that the Clerk shall serve this Order on petitioner by regular U.S. mail.

KE fNMCNULTY
United States District Judge

2