Terrell v. Davis

Filing 25

ORDER GRANTING 24 MOTION for Extension of Time to Reply tot he Respondent's Answer, GRANTING 21 MOTION for Extension of Time to Reply, DENYING 19 MOTION for Sanctions ( Reply due by 6/22/2018)(Signed by Judge George C Hanks, Jr) Parties notified. Current docket sheet mailed to Petitioner.(dperez, 3)

United States District Court
Southern District of Texas

ENTERED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
GALVESTON DIVISION
SHERON GABRIEL TERRELL,
TDCJ # 01779108,
Petitioner,
VS.
LORIE DAVIS,
Respondent.

§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§

May 22, 2018
David J. Bradley, Clerk

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:16-CV-0179

ORDER
Petitioner Sheron Gabriel Terrell has filed a petition for habeas corpus (Dkt. 5)
seeking relief from a state court conviction. Respondent has filed an answer (Dkt. 16)
and a copy of the state court records (Dkt. 17, 18). Because Respondent did not furnish
Petitioner with a copy of all state court records, Petitioner has filed a motion for sanctions
against Respondent (Dkt. 19) and two motions for extension of time (Dkt. 21, 24).
Respondent stated in her answer that she would not furnish Petitioner with copies
of the trial, appeal, and state habeas proceedings, citing Sixta v. Thaler, 615 F.3d 569,
570 (5th Cir. 2010) (Dkt. 16, at 6). Petitioner argues in his motion for sanctions (Dkt.
19) that Respondent’s failure to furnish the records violates Habeas Rule 5(c), which
requires a respondent to “attach to the answer parts of the transcript that the respondent
considers relevant.” Rules Governing § 2254 Cases, Rule 5(c), 28 U.S.C. foll. § 2254
(emphasis added). Petitioner also cites to this Court’s order to answer instructing the
parties generally to “serve the other party . . . with a copy of every pleading, letter, or
other document submitted for consideration by the Court” (Dkt. 6, at 3). In separately
1/3

filed objections (Dkt. 20), Petitioner argues that the records filed by Respondent should
be forwarded to Petitioner because the Answer makes “specific factual assertions” citing
to records from this Court’s filing system (ECF) or from state court records (SHCR, CR,
and RR). The Court notes that none of Petitioner’s filings assert a specific need for any
particular portion of the record.
In Sixta, the Fifth Circuit held that “[w]hen the respondent does, in fact, attach
exhibits to the answer, there can be little dispute that those exhibits must be served
together with the answer itself on the habeas petitioner.” Sixta, 615 F.3d at 572. Because
the respondent in Sixta had not attached exhibits to the answer, but instead had filed the
entire state court record with the district court, the Fifth Circuit affirmed the lower court’s
holding that the respondent had satisfied his procedural obligations to petitioner. Id. at
572-73. The Fifth Circuit did not reach the issue of “the nature of the respondent’s duty
and discretion” under Habeas Rule 5(c) to attach the portions of the record that
respondent deems relevant. Id. at 573.
Respondent’s answer in this case did not attach exhibits. Rather, as in Sixta,
Respondent separately filed the complete state court record. Because Sixta does not
require the respondent to furnish the petitioner with copies of the complete record,
Petitioner’s motion for sanctions (Dkt. 19) is DENIED. However, in order to assist
Petitioner in understanding the record citations in the answer, the Court will instruct the
Clerk to supply him with an updated docket sheet. Moreover, Petitioner may, if
appropriate, include requests for specific portions of the record in his reply to the answer.

2/3

If Petitioner makes such a request, he should explain in detail why copies of those
specific portions are necessary to properly support his claims.
Petitioner also seeks an extension of time to file his reply to the answer until after
the Court rules on his request for sanctions (Dkt. 21, 24).

The Court GRANTS the

motions and ORDERS Petitioner to file his reply by June 22, 2018.
The Clerk will provide copies of this order to the parties. The Clerk also will
provide Petitioner with a copy of the current docket sheet in this case.
SIGNED at Galveston, Texas, this 22nd day of May, 2018.
___________________________________
George C. Hanks Jr.
United States District Judge

3/3