Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

WILSON v. RIVARD, 15-CV-13885. (2016)

Court: District Court, E.D. Michigan Number: infdco20160127a47 Visitors: 5
Filed: Jan. 26, 2016
Latest Update: Jan. 26, 2016
Summary: OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER'S MOTION FOR NON-PREJUDICIAL DISMISSAL, DISMISSING WITHOUT PREJUDICE THE PETITION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS, AND DENYING A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY SEAN F. COX , District Judge . This matter is before the Court on habeas petitioner Jovon Wilson's motion to voluntarily dismiss his pending petition for a writ of habeas corpus so that he may return to the state courts and pursue further challenges to his state criminal proceedings. The Court previou
More

OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER'S MOTION FOR NON-PREJUDICIAL DISMISSAL, DISMISSING WITHOUT PREJUDICE THE PETITION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS, AND DENYING A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY

This matter is before the Court on habeas petitioner Jovon Wilson's motion to voluntarily dismiss his pending petition for a writ of habeas corpus so that he may return to the state courts and pursue further challenges to his state criminal proceedings. The Court previously denied Petitioner's motion to stay the proceedings and hold this case in abeyance. Given that Petitioner seeks to exhaust additional issues in the state courts and given that he has sufficient time to do so within the one-year statute of limitations applicable to federal habeas actions, dismissal of the present petition is appropriate.

Accordingly, the Court grants Petitioner's motion and dismisses without prejudice the petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Additionally, the Court denies a certificate of appealability as reasonable jurists could not debate the correctness of the Court's procedural ruling. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484-85 (2000). This case is closed. Should Petitioner wish to seek federal habeas relief following the exhaustion of state court remedies, he must file a new habeas petition in federal court within the time remaining on the one-year period of limitations.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer