SHATTO v. STEWARD, 3:14-cv-01579. (2014)
Court: District Court, M.D. Tennessee
Number: infdco20140815i57
Visitors: 9
Filed: Aug. 06, 2014
Latest Update: Aug. 06, 2014
Summary: ORDER TODD CAMPBELL, District Judge. Before the Court is petitioner Randy Lee Shatto's pro se petition for the writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. 2254, challenging a 2004 conviction in the Criminal Court for Davidson County, Tennessee. The $5.00 filing fee has been paid in full. Pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing 2254 Cases, this Court is to promptly examine the habeas petition and to dismiss it "[i]f it plainly appears from the petition and any attached exhibits that the pet
Summary: ORDER TODD CAMPBELL, District Judge. Before the Court is petitioner Randy Lee Shatto's pro se petition for the writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. 2254, challenging a 2004 conviction in the Criminal Court for Davidson County, Tennessee. The $5.00 filing fee has been paid in full. Pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing 2254 Cases, this Court is to promptly examine the habeas petition and to dismiss it "[i]f it plainly appears from the petition and any attached exhibits that the peti..
More
ORDER
TODD CAMPBELL, District Judge.
Before the Court is petitioner Randy Lee Shatto's pro se petition for the writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging a 2004 conviction in the Criminal Court for Davidson County, Tennessee. The $5.00 filing fee has been paid in full.
Pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing § 2254 Cases, this Court is to promptly examine the habeas petition and to dismiss it "[i]f it plainly appears from the petition and any attached exhibits that the petitioner is not entitled to relief in the district court." The Court has conducted a preliminary review of the petition and finds that the petitioner has stated at least colorable claims for relief, including claims that he was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel in violation of the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution and that his conviction was in violation of the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment. He also claims the statute of limitations should be equitably tolled. Accordingly, the respondent MUST file an answer, motion, or other response within 30 days of the date this order is docketed.
The Clerk is DIRECTED to serve a copy of the petition and this Order on the respondent and the Attorney General of Tennessee. Rule 4, Rules Gov'g § 2254 Cases.
It is so ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
