Kloehr v. State of Oklahoma

Filing 28

OPINION AND ORDER by Judge John E Dowdell Petitioner's Motion to Rehear Habeas Corpus Petition (Doc. 27) is construed as a timely notice of appeal. The Clerk of Court is directed to forward the notice of appeal and this Order to the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals. (Re: 27 MOTION to Reconsider ) (SAS, Chambers)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
STEPHEN CORT KLOEHR,
Petitioner,
v.
E. SCOTT PRUITT, Oklahoma
Attorney General,
Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 16-CV-376-JED-PJC

OPINION AND ORDER
On September 12, 2017, the Court dismissed without prejudice Petitioner’s petition for a writ
of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for lack of subject matter jurisdiction (Doc. 25). The
dismissal was premised on the Court’s determination that Petitioner was not “in custody” when the
petition was filed. The Court also denied Petitioner a certificate of appealability.
On October 4, 2017, Petitioner filed a “Motion to Rehear Habeas Corpus Petition,”
requesting a certificate of appealability, so he can file an appeal in the Tenth Circuit Court of
Appeals (Doc. 27). Construing the motion liberally, see Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 (1972), the
Court considers the motion to be a timely notice of appeal. Therefore, the Clerk of Court is directed
to forward the notice of appeal and this Order to the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals.
ACCORDINGLY, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1.

Petitioner’s Motion to Rehear Habeas Corpus Petition (Doc. 27) is construed as a timely
notice of appeal.

2.

The Clerk of Court is directed to forward the notice of appeal and this Order to the Tenth
Circuit Court of Appeals.

ORDERED THIS 7th day of February, 2018.

2