Erdman v. Price

Full title: DENNIS GUY ERDMAN, Petitioner, v. JANETTE PRICE, Respondent

Court: United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division

Date published: Mar 6, 2006

Case No. 03-CV-74590-DT (E.D. Mich. Mar. 6, 2006)

Opinion

Case No. 03-CV-74590-DT.

March 6, 2006

ORDER INTERPRETING FEBRUARY 16, 2006 LETTER AS MOTION TO SUPPLY DOCUMENTS AND DENYING THE SAME

ROBERT CLELAND, District Judge

Former Petitioner Dennis Guy Erdman filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus, under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On December 16, 2003, the court issued an "Order Transferring Case to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A)." On August 18, 2004, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals issued an Order dismissing Erdman's appeal. See In re: Dennis Erdman, No. 04-1034 (6th Cir. Aug. 18, 2004). In the Order dismissing the appeal, the Sixth Circuit stated, in pertinent part:

By order of this court filed 9/12/02 in case 02-1529, Mr. Erdman was "prohibited from filing ANY document with this court or the district court challenging his convictions. The clerk of this court and the clerk of the district court are ORDERED not to accept for filing ANY document or action relating to Erdman's convictions and sentences."

Id.

Erdman has subsequently filed various documents in this court relating to his convictions, each of which the court has stricken in accordance with the Sixth Circuit's August 18, 2004 order. ( See 3/09/05 3/15/05 Orders.) On February 8, 2006 Erdman submitted a letter to the court, which was filed on February 16, 2006, requesting a copy of his "docket journal entry," for his "pending motion for relief from judgment and amended habeas corpus petition." After the Sixth Circuit's August 18, 2004 order, however, the former Petitioner no longer has any pending matters before this court. Further, Erdman has been specifically prohibited from filing any further documents relating to his conviction. The court can therefore discern no basis on which to grant the request and provide Erdman with a copy of his docket at taxpayer's expense.

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Erdman's February 16, 2006 letter [Dkt. # 29], interpreted as a motion to supply a copy of his docket, is DENIED. This matter is closed. The former Petitioner no longer has any pending matters before this court. Any other papers submitted to this court by Erdman contrary to the direction of the Sixth Circuit, as explained above, will be discarded.