United States District Court, D. Nebraska
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Richard G. Kopf Senior United States District Judge
court has conducted an initial review of the Amended Petition
for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Filing No. 6) to determine whether
the claims made by Petitioner are, when liberally construed,
potentially cognizable in federal court. It appears
Petitioner has made one claim.
and summarized for clarity, the claim asserted by Petitioner
CLAIM ONE: Petitioner’s trial counsel was ineffective
because counsel failed to object to the amended information.
Liberally construed, the court preliminarily decides that
Petitioner’s claim is potentially cognizable in federal
court. However, the court cautions that no determination has
been made regarding the merits of these claims or any
defenses thereto or whether there are procedural bars that
will prevent Petitioner from obtaining the relief sought.
THEREFORE ORDERED that:
initial review of the Amended Petition (Filing No. 6), the
court preliminarily determines that Petitioner’s claim
is potentially cognizable in federal court.
July 5, 2016, Respondent must file a motion for summary
judgment or state court records in support of an answer. The
clerk of the court is directed to set a pro se case
management deadline in this case using the following text:
July 5, 2016: deadline for Respondent to
file state court records in support of answer or motion for
Respondent elects to file a motion for summary judgment, the
following procedures must be followed by Respondent and
motion for summary judgment must be accompanied by a separate
brief, submitted at the time the motion is filed.
motion for summary judgment must be supported by any state
court records that are necessary to support the motion. Those
records must be contained in a separate filing entitled:
“Designation of State Court Records in Support of
Motion for Summary Judgment.” C. Copies of the motion
for summary judgment, the designation, including state court
records, and Respondent’s brief must be served on
Petitioner except that Respondent is only required
to provide Petitioner with a copy of the specific pages of
the record that are cited in Respondent’s brief. In the
event that the designation of state court records is deemed
insufficient by Petitioner, Petitioner may file a motion with
the court requesting additional documents. Such motion must
set forth the documents requested and the reasons the
documents are relevant to the cognizable claims.
later than 30 days following the filing of the motion for
summary judgment, Petitioner must file and serve a brief in
opposition to the motion for summary judgment. Petitioner may
not submit other documents unless directed to do so by the
later than 30 days after Petitioner’s brief is filed,
Respondent must file and serve a reply brief. In the event
that Respondent elects not to file a reply brief, he should
inform the court by filing a notice stating that he will not
file a reply brief and that the motion is therefore fully
submitted for decision.
the motion for summary judgment is denied, Respondent must
file an answer, a designation and a brief that complies with
terms of this order. (See the following paragraph.)
The documents must be filed no later ...