Finlayson v. Brewer

E.D. Michigan

Finlayson v. Brewer

DecidedFebruary 11, 2021

Docket2:19-cv-10884

StatusUnknown

This text of Finlayson v. Brewer (Finlayson v. Brewer) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Michigan primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Finlayson v. Brewer, (E.D. Mich. 2021).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION LISA FINLAYSON, Petitioner, Case Number 19-10884 v. Honorable David M. Lawson SHAWN BREWER, Respondent. / ORDER REOPENING CASE AND DIRECTING RESPONDENT TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE AND RULE 5 MATERIALS Petitioner Lisa Finlayson filed a pre se petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 ULS.C. § 2254, On May 9, 2019, the Court entered an order holding the case in abeyance so that Finlayson could exhaust her state court remedies with respect to claims that she did not raise on direct appeal. The petitioner was directed to file an amended petition within 28 days after the conclusion of the state court proceedings on her unexhausted claims. On January 26, 2021, Finlayson filed a motion to amend her petition and to reopen the case, asserting that she had done so within 28 days after the Michigan Supreme Court finally denied her bid for post-conviction relief. Federal courts have the power to order that a habeas petition be reinstated upon timely request by a habeas petitioner. Rodriguez v. Jones, 625 F. Supp. 2d 552, 559 (E.D. Mich. 2009). Because it appears that Finlayson has complied with the deadlines established by the Court’s order staying the case, the Court will order the case to be reopened. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the petitioner’s motion to amend the petition and to reopen the case (ECF No, 12) is GRANTED, the stay of the proceedings is DISSOLVED, and the Clerk of Court shall REOPEN the case and restore it to the active docket. The claims and

arguments that were incorporated into the motion to reopen are deemed FILED as the petitioner’s supplement and amendment to her original petition. It is further ORDERED that the respondent shall file a response to the amended petition and any additional Rule 5 materials on or before March 11, 2021. s/David M, Lawson DAVID M. LAWSON United States District Judge Dated: February 11, 2021

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION LISA FINLAYSON, Petitioner, Case Number 19-10884 v. Honorable David M. Lawson SHAWN BREWER, Respondent. / ORDER REOPENING CASE AND DIRECTING RESPONDENT TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE AND RULE 5 MATERIALS Petitioner Lisa Finlayson filed a pre se petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 ULS.C. § 2254, On May 9, 2019, the Court entered an order holding the case in abeyance so that Finlayson could exhaust her state court remedies with respect to claims that she did not raise on direct appeal. The petitioner was directed to file an amended petition within 28 days after the conclusion of the state court proceedings on her unexhausted claims. On January 26, 2021, Finlayson filed a motion to amend her petition and to reopen the case, asserting that she had done so within 28 days after the Michigan Supreme Court finally denied her bid for post-conviction relief. Federal courts have the power to order that a habeas petition be reinstated upon timely request by a habeas petitioner. Rodriguez v. Jones, 625 F. Supp. 2d 552, 559 (E.D. Mich. 2009). Because it appears that Finlayson has complied with the deadlines established by the Court’s order staying the case, the Court will order the case to be reopened. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the petitioner’s motion to amend the petition and to reopen the case (ECF No, 12) is GRANTED, the stay of the proceedings is DISSOLVED, and the Clerk of Court shall REOPEN the case and restore it to the active docket. The claims and

arguments that were incorporated into the motion to reopen are deemed FILED as the petitioner’s supplement and amendment to her original petition. It is further ORDERED that the respondent shall file a response to the amended petition and any additional Rule 5 materials on or before March 11, 2021. s/David M, Lawson DAVID M. LAWSON United States District Judge Dated: February 11, 2021

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Finlayson v. Brewer, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/finlayson-v-brewer-mied-2021.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack