From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Holmes v. Rivard

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
May 1, 2012
Case No. 2:12-cv-11037 (E.D. Mich. May. 1, 2012)

Opinion

Case No. 2:12-cv-11037

05-01-2012

QUINTIN L. HOLMES, Petitioner, v. STEVE RIVARD, Respondent.


Honorable Patrick J. Duggan


ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE MOTION TO HOLD HABEAS

PETITION IN ABEYANCE AND CLOSING CASE

Quintin L. Holmes ("Holmes") is a Michigan prisoner incarcerated at the St. Louis Correctional Facility in St. Louis, Michigan. On March 8, 2012, Holmes submitted to the Clerk of this Court a pro se motion to hold a habeas petition in abeyance while he pursues state remedies. Holmes did not sign his motion, and he did not pay the filing fee for a habeas action or apply for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. More significantly, Holmes does not have a habeas corpus petition pending in this court. In fact, a search of the United States Courts' PACER system reflects that Holmes has not filed a habeas corpus petition in any federal court.

Before the Court can resolve the motion for a stay, Holmes must file a habeas corpus petition and either pay the filing fee for the action or seek leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Until then, Holmes' motion is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. In the copy of this Order to be served on Holmes, the Court is enclosing a form petition for the writ of habeas corpus and an application to proceed in forma pauperis. If Holmes intends to seek habeas corpus relief in this court, he must complete and sign the petition and return it for filing. With the petition, Holmes also must submit the $5.00 filing fee or a signed and completed application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. This case is closed.

The Court notes that Holmes' motion fails to provide sufficient information to determine whether "stay and abeyance" is appropriate. Pursuant to Supreme Court precedent, this procedure should be utilized "only in limited circumstances where the petitioner has shown good cause for his failure to exhaust state remedies." Hodge v. Haeberlin, 579 F.3d 627, 638 (6th Cir. 2009) (citing Rhines v. Weber, 544 U.S. 269, 277, 125 S. Ct. 1528 (2005)).

SO ORDERED.

PATRICK J. DUGGAN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Copy to:

Quintin L. Holmes, #582748

St. Louis Correctional Facility

8585 N. Croswell Road

St. Louis, MI 48880


Summaries of

Holmes v. Rivard

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
May 1, 2012
Case No. 2:12-cv-11037 (E.D. Mich. May. 1, 2012)
Case details for

Holmes v. Rivard

Case Details

Full title:QUINTIN L. HOLMES, Petitioner, v. STEVE RIVARD, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Date published: May 1, 2012

Citations

Case No. 2:12-cv-11037 (E.D. Mich. May. 1, 2012)