Rivera v. Sellers, CV 113-161. (2018)
Court: District Court, S.D. Georgia
Number: infdco20181023g39
Visitors: 19
Filed: Oct. 22, 2018
Latest Update: Oct. 22, 2018
Summary: ORDER J. RANDAL HALL , Chief District Judge . Before the Court are the following motions: Petitioner's motion to maintain the stay (Doc. 97), Petitioner's motion for reconsideration (Doc. 98), and Petitioner's motion to substitute a complete version of his motion to appoint supplemental counsel (Doc. 102). Petitioner first asks the Court to maintain the stay of his case pending the Supreme Court's review of the Eleventh Circuit's decision in Wilson v. Warden . 1 Because the Supreme Court
Summary: ORDER J. RANDAL HALL , Chief District Judge . Before the Court are the following motions: Petitioner's motion to maintain the stay (Doc. 97), Petitioner's motion for reconsideration (Doc. 98), and Petitioner's motion to substitute a complete version of his motion to appoint supplemental counsel (Doc. 102). Petitioner first asks the Court to maintain the stay of his case pending the Supreme Court's review of the Eleventh Circuit's decision in Wilson v. Warden . 1 Because the Supreme Court d..
More
ORDER
J. RANDAL HALL, Chief District Judge.
Before the Court are the following motions: Petitioner's motion to maintain the stay (Doc. 97), Petitioner's motion for reconsideration (Doc. 98), and Petitioner's motion to substitute a complete version of his motion to appoint supplemental counsel (Doc. 102). Petitioner first asks the Court to maintain the stay of his case pending the Supreme Court's review of the Eleventh Circuit's decision in Wilson v. Warden.1 Because the Supreme Court decided the case on April 17, 2018,2 Petitioner's motion to maintain the stay (Doc. 97) is DENIED as MOOT. The Court hereby VACATES the STAY of the present case.
Second, Petitioner asks the Court to reconsider its order denying Petitioner's motion to amend and motion to appoint supplemental counsel. (Docs. 96, 98.) Now that the stay is lifted, this Court will decide Petitioner's motion for reconsideration.
Lastly, Petitioner presents an unopposed motion to substitute a complete version of his motion to appoint supplemental counsel.3 Although the Court already denied Petitioner's motion to appoint supplemental counsel, the Court GRANTS his motion to substitute (Doc. 102) and will use the complete version in deciding Petitioner's motion for reconsideration.
ORDER ENTERED.
FootNotes
1. Wilson v. Warden, 834 F.3d 1227 (11th Cir. 2016), rev'd, 138 S.Ct. 1188 (2018).
2. Wilson v. Sellers, 138 S.Ct. 1188 (2018).
3. Pages forty-three and forty-four are missing from the electronic copy of Petitioner's motion to appoint supplemental counsel. (Pet.'s Mot. to Substitute, Doc. 102, at 2.) The substituted version contains the missing pages.
Source: Leagle
