Worlumarti v. United States of America

Filing 11

ORDER finding as moot 10 Motion for Certificate of Appealability. See the attached order, which will also be filed in 97-CR-485. Ordered by Judge John Gleeson on 5/22/2014. (Aronoff, Peter)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

ROBERTO RODRIGUEZ,
Petitioner,
- versus -

ORDER
13-CV-5811 (JG)

THOMAS LAVALLEY,
Superintendent,
Respondent.

JOHN GLEESON, United States District Judge:
Roberto Rodriguez has petitioned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for a writ of
habeas corpus. At the March 31, 2014 argument on the motion, Rodriguez raised an apparently
unexhausted claim of ineffective assistance of counsel – he argued that his lawyer failed to
investigate a potentially meritorious intoxication defense prior to trial, and as a consequence
failed to present any such evidence during trial.
I asked Rodriguez’s trial counsel, Kleon Andreadis, to provide a written statement
to the court responding to Rodriguez’s claim of ineffective assistance. Andreadis has filed that
statement, and I am sending Rodriguez a copy. In addition, respondent has filed a letter
opposing any stay in this case.
Based in part on Andreadis’s statement, I believe it is unlikely that Rodriguez will
be able to demonstrate that it is appropriate for me to stay this case and appoint him counsel for
the purpose of raising his unexhausted claim in the state courts. A stay would not be appropriate
if the new claim is meritless, or if Rodriguez cannot demonstrate good cause for his failure to
raise it until now. See Rhines v. Weber, 544 U.S. 269, 277 (2005).

By Monday, June 30, 2014, Rodriguez shall file any additional papers (if he
wishes) arguing why a stay would be appropriate.

So ordered.
John Gleeson, U.S.D.J.

Dated: May 20, 2014
Brooklyn, New York

2