United States District Court, D. Nebraska
EMMANUEL S. YANGA, Petitioner,
STATE OF NEBRASKA, DIR. SCOTT FRAKES, and MADSEN, Warden, Respondents.
RICHARD G. KOPF SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
matter is before the court on preliminary review of
Petitioner Emanuel S. Yanga's Petition for Writ of Habeas
Corpus (Filing No. 4) brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
2254. The purpose of this review is to determine whether
Petitioner's claims, when liberally construed, are
potentially cognizable in federal court.
and summarized for clarity, the claims asserted by Petitioner
regarding the state misdemeanor case in the County Court of
Lancaster County, Nebraska (county court #CR 14 0017008,
appeal to district court # CR-15-552 and appeal to the
Nebraska Court of Appeals # A-17-728) are set forth below:
Claim One: Both trial counsel and appellate
counsel provided ineffective assistance of counsel under the
Claim Two: The prosecutor engaged in
prosecutorial misconduct in violation of the Due Process
Claim Three: The trial court abused its
discretion in violation of the Due Process Clause.
Claim Four: The Petitioner was denied Due
Process of Law, Equal Protection of the Law, and the Fifth
Amendment right to remain silent and to be free from double
jeopardy by the trial court.
court determines that these claims, when liberally construed,
are potentially cognizable in federal court. However, the
court cautions Petitioner that no determination has been made
regarding the merits of these claims or any defenses to them
or whether there are procedural bars that will prevent
Petitioner from obtaining the relief sought.
THEREFORE ORDERED that:
initial review of the habeas corpus petition (Filing No. 4),
the court preliminarily determines that Petitioner's
claims, as they are set forth in this Memorandum and Order,
are potentially cognizable in federal court.
May 21, 2018, 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: May 21, 2018: deadline for Respondent
to file state court records in support of answer or motion
for summary judgment.
Respondent elects to file a motion for summary judgment, the
following procedures must be followed by Respondent and
A. The motion for summary judgment must be accompanied by a
separate brief, submitted at the time the motion is filed.
B. The 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 ...