United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Indianapolis Division
ENTRY AND ORDER TO
TANYA WALTON PRATT, District Judge.
Petitioner Menes Ankh El's has filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus. The status of this matter is as follows: The court continues to seek information sufficient to permit the review required by Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2255 Proceedings in the United States District Courts. Additionally, a mandamus action filed by the petitioner appears to be pending on his in forma pauperis request in the Court of Appeals. In an effort to advance these proceedings, the court makes the following Entry.
I. Information Sought
This court may entertain a petition for writ of habeas corpus on "behalf of a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court only on the ground that he is in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States." 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a).
A federal court may not grant an application for writ of habeas corpus on behalf of a person in state custody with respect to any claim that was adjudicated on the merits in state court proceedings unless the adjudication of the claim: (1) "resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States"; or (2) "resulted in a decision that was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the State court proceeding." 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d).
Petitioner Menes Ankh El shall have through March 13, 2014, in which to 1) identify which of his habeas claims were addressed on the merits by the Indiana state courts, and 2) explain whether and how the habeas claims addressed on the merits by the Indiana state courts justify relief under § 2254(d)(1) or § 2254(d)(2), or both.
II. Show Cause Order
The petitioner's custodian is directed to answer the allegations of the petitioner's petition for a writ of habeas corpus, and in doing so shall show cause why the relief sought by the petitioner should not be granted insofar as the petitioner challenges the deprivation of a recognized liberty interest affecting the fact or the duration of his confinement. This shall be done within twenty (20) days after the date this Entry is signed. The petitioner shall have twenty (20) days after service of such answer or return to order to show cause on him in which to reply.
A copy of this Entry and Order to Show Cause shall be sent to the Indiana Attorney General through a Notice of Electronic Filing ("NEF") generated by the court's CM/ECF case management system. The Indiana Attorney General has ...