RHODES v. HOBBS, 5:11cv00317 JMM-JTR. (2012)
Court: District Court, E.D. Arkansas
Number: infdco20120626b56
Visitors: 10
Filed: Jun. 25, 2012
Latest Update: Jun. 25, 2012
Summary: ORDER A. THOMAS RAY, Magistrate Judge. Respondent has filed a Response (docket entry #16) arguing that Petitioner's 28 U.S.C. 2254 habeas claims are procedurally defaulted due to Petitioner's failure to properly raise them in state court, are without merit, or were reasonably adjudicated by the state courts. A Reply to the Response would be helpful to resolution of this action. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT Petitioner is directed to file, on or before July 25, 2012, a Reply addressing the
Summary: ORDER A. THOMAS RAY, Magistrate Judge. Respondent has filed a Response (docket entry #16) arguing that Petitioner's 28 U.S.C. 2254 habeas claims are procedurally defaulted due to Petitioner's failure to properly raise them in state court, are without merit, or were reasonably adjudicated by the state courts. A Reply to the Response would be helpful to resolution of this action. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT Petitioner is directed to file, on or before July 25, 2012, a Reply addressing the ..
More
ORDER
A. THOMAS RAY, Magistrate Judge.
Respondent has filed a Response (docket entry #16) arguing that Petitioner's 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas claims are procedurally defaulted due to Petitioner's failure to properly raise them in state court, are without merit, or were reasonably adjudicated by the state courts. A Reply to the Response would be helpful to resolution of this action.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT Petitioner is directed to file, on or before July 25, 2012, a Reply addressing the arguments for dismissal raised in the Response.
Source: Leagle
