IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
April 20, 2006
ANTONIO SIERRA, PETITIONER,
DAVID DIGUGLIELMO, ET AL., RESPONDENTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge Caputo
Petitioner commenced this pro se action with a petition for writ of habeas corpus (Doc. 1, Att. 1) filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania ("Eastern District Court"). Thereafter, the Eastern District Court directed Petitioner to file a revised petition, acknowledging receipt of notice in compliance with Mason v. Meyers, 208 F.3d 414 (3d Cir. 2000) (requiring district courts to provide notice to pro se habeas petitioners of the implications of 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b) before ruling on their petitions). Upon receipt of the revised petition (Doc. 1, Att. 5), the Eastern District Court directed transfer of the case to this Court, and the case was received in this Court on March 23, 2006.
By Order dated April 3, 2006, this Court directed service of the revised petition on Respondents named therein, and the Court ordered Respondents to show cause within twenty days why the relief requested in the habeas petition should not be granted. Respondents were also directed to file a memorandum of law as well as those portions of any transcripts the Respondents deem relevant to disposing of the claims raised in the petition. Presently pending is Petitioner's "order of transcripts" (Doc. 14), in which he requests copies of certain transcripts related to his state court appeal. Since Respondents have been directed to produce copies of relevant transcripts, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Petitioner's "order of transcripts" (Doc. 14) is construed as a motion for production of documents, and the motion is DENIED as premature.
A. RICHARD CAPUTO United States District Judge
© 1992-2006 VersusLaw Inc.