Parsley v. Lamanna

Filing 22

ORDER LIFTING STAY, Motions terminated: 18 EX PARTE MOTION Lift Stay re: 14 Order Staying Case,, . filed by J. Lamanna., On this record, the Court agrees that petitioner's sentencing-related § 440.20 petition is not a basis for a further stay of this habeas action. Accordingly, the stay is LIFTED. Respondent is directed to reply to petitioner's outstanding motion to amend [Dkt. 17] no later than May 28, 2021; respondent's submission should addre ss whether petitioner has presented his video re-enactment claim in any state forum. Any reply from petitioner is due by June 28, 2021. The Clerk shall terminate the motion at Dkt. 18, and mail a copy of this Order to petitioner at the address appearing on the docket. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Paul E. Davison on 4/28/2021) ( Replies due by 6/28/2021.) (ks) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
-----------------------------------------------------X
CHARLES PARSLEY,
Petitioner,
-against-

ORDER LIFTING STAY
19 Civ. 4756 (VB)(PED)

J. LAMANNA,
Respondent.
-----------------------------------------------------X
On November 11, 2019, this Court stayed this action on the basis of petitioner’s
representation that his pending coram nobis petition presented one of petitioner’s habeas claims
to the state courts. [Dkt. 14.] On October 13, 2020, petitioner – without addressing the ongoing
stay – moved to amend his petition to add a claim related to a staged video re-enactment in
which petitioner claims he was required to participate. [Dkt. 17.] Notably, petitioner’s motion to
amend does not indicate whether or how the video re-enactment claim was presented to any state
court.
On January 8, 2021, respondent moved to lift the stay on the ground that the coram nobis
petition which was the basis for the stay had been denied by all relevant state courts. [Dkt. 18.]
On February 3, 2021, petitioner requested that the Court maintain the stay on the basis of a
pending petition pursuant to § 440.20, N.Y. Crim. P. L. [Dkt. 19.] On February 17, 2020,
respondent filed a response, observing that petitioner’s § 440.20 petition raised a discrete
sentencing issue which, although undecided, “is of no relevance to the instant habeas petition.”
[Dkt. 20.] Petitioner filed a brief reply taking issue with respondent’s description of the
sentencing issue. [Dkt. 21.]
On this record, the Court agrees that petitioner’s sentencing-related § 440.20 petition is

not a basis for a further stay of this habeas action. Accordingly, the stay is LIFTED.
Respondent is directed to reply to petitioner’s outstanding motion to amend [Dkt. 17] no later
than May 28, 2021; respondent’s submission should address whether petitioner has presented his
video re-enactment claim in any state forum. Any reply from petitioner is due by June 28, 2021.
The Clerk shall terminate the motion at Dkt. 18, and mail a copy of this Order to
petitioner at the address appearing on the docket.
Dated: April 28, 2021
White Plains, New York

SO ORDERED

___________________________
PAUL E. DAVISON, U.S.M.J.

-2-