Owings v. Douglas ( 2024 )

UNITEDSTATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERNDISTRICTOFMICHIGAN SOUTHERNDIVISION BRENTALANOWINGS, Petitioner, Civil Action No.21-cv-11355 HONORABLEMARK A.GOLDSMITH v. UNITEDSTATES DISTRICTJUDGE ADAM DOUGLAS, Respondent, ____________________________________/ OPINIONANDORDER(1)GRANTING MOTIONTO REOPENTHE CASE TOTHE COURT’S ACTIVE DOCKET (Dkt.7),(2)AMENDING THE CAPTION,(3)GRANTING THE MOTIONTO AMENDPETITIONFORWRIT OF HABEASCORPUS (Dkt.8),(4) ORDERING THAT THE ORIGINAL ANDAMENDEDPETITIONS (Dkts.1,8)BE SERVEDUPONTHERESPONDENT ANDTHE MICHIGANATTORNEYGENERAL, AND(5) DIRECTING RESPONDENT TO FILE ANANSWERAND THE RULE 5 MATERIALS BrentAlanOwings(Petitioner),confinedattheSaginawCorrectionalFacilityinFreeland, Michigan, filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Dkt. 1). Petitioner challenges his convictions for first-degree home invasion, Mich. Comp. L. § 750.110a(2), and assault with intent to do great bodily harm less than murder, Mich. Comp. L. § 750.84. The case was held in abeyance so that Petitioner could exhaust his claims in the state courts. Owings v.Miniard,No.21-cv-11355,2021WL3422382(E.D.Mich.July23,2021). Petitionerhasfiledamotiontoreopenthecaseandanamendedpetitionforwritofhabeas corpus, which is construed as a motion to amend the petition. The motion to reopen the case is granted. The Clerk of the Court is ordered to reopen the case to the Court’s active docket. The CourtwillalsoamendthecaptiontoreflectthenameofPetitioner’scurrentwarden. TheClerkof the Court shall serve a copy of the original and amended petitions for writ of habeas corpus upon respondent and the Michigan Attorney General’s Office by first class mail. Respondent shall file an answer and the Rule 5 materials within 180 days of the Court’s order. Petitioner has 45 days from thereceipt ofthe answerto filea replybrief. Federal courts have the power to order that a habeas petition be reinstated upon timely request by a habeas petitioner, following the exhaustion of state court remedies. See, e.g., Rodriguez v. Jones, 625 F. Supp. 2d 552, 559 (E.D. Mich. 2009). Petitioner has exhausted his claims with thestatecourts. Thecaseis reopened. TheCourtwillalsoorderthatthecaptioninthiscasebeamendedtoreflectthattheproper respondent in this case is now Adam Douglas, the warden of the Saginaw Correctional Facility, where Petitioner is now incarcerated. The only proper respondent in a habeas case is the habeas petitioner’scustodian,whichinthecaseofanincarceratedhabeaspetitionerwouldbethewarden. See Edwards v. Johns, 450 F. Supp. 2d 755, 757 (E.D. Mich. 2006); See also Rule 2(a), Rules Governing §2254Cases, 28foll.U.S.C.§2254. The Court permits Petitioner to amend his habeas petition because it advances claims that mayhavearguablemerit. See,e.g.,Bradenv.UnitedStates, 817F.3d926, 930(6th Cir.2016). TheClerkoftheCourt shall serveacopyoftheoriginal andamendedpetitions forwrit of habeas corpus (Dkts. 1, 8) and a copy of this Order on Respondent and on the Attorney General for the State of Michigan by first class mail as provided in Rule 4 of the Rules Governing § 2254 Cases. See Coffee v. Harry, No. 04-cv-71209, 2005 WL 1861943, at * 2 (E.D. Mich. Aug. 2, 2005). The Respondent shall file an answer within 180 days of the Court’s order. See Erwin v. Elo, 130 F. Supp. 2d 887, 891 (E.D. Mich. 2001); 28 U.S.C. § 2243. Respondent is also ordered to provide this Court with the Rule 5 materials at the time that it files its answer. See Griffin v. Rogers,308F.3d647,653(6thCir.2002);Rule5,RulesGoverning§2254Cases,28U.S.C.foll. § 2254. Petitioner shall have 45 days from the receipt of the answer to file a reply brief, if he so chooses. SeeRule5(e), RulesGoverning §2254 Cases, 28U.S.C.foll.§2254. SOORDERED. Dated:June28,2024 s/MarkA.Goldsmith Detroit,Michigan MARKA.GOLDSMITH UnitedStates DistrictJudge