Jenkins v. Schiebner

2:25-cv-10313Mied10.11.2025

Gesamter Gesetzestext

1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
SAMUEL JENKINS, JR.,
Petitioner, 	Civil No. 2:25-cv-10313
HONORABLE DENISE PAGE HOOD
v.
JAMES R. SCHIEBNER,
Respondent.
________________________________/
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR AN
ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO FILE HIS POST-CONVICTION MOTION
FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT WITH THE STATE COURT
Samuel Jenkins, (“Petitioner”), filed a pro se petition for a writ of
habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The Court granted Petitioner’s
motion to stay and held the petition for a writ of habeas corpus in abeyance
so 	that 	Petitioner 	could 	exhaust 	additional 	claims 	in 	the 	state 	courts.
Petitioner was given ninety (90) days to file his post-conviction motion for
relief from judgment in the state court.
Petitioner has filed a motion for an enlargement of time to file his post-
conviction motion with the state trial court. Petitioner claims that he needs
additional time to file his post-conviction motion for relief from judgment
Case 2:25-cv-10313-DPH-CI ECF No. 11, PageID.<pageID> Filed 11/10/25 Page 1 of 3
2
because he needs to obtain legal documents from the state courts that are
necessary for the preparation of his motion as well as collecting affidavits
from witnesses that will support his claims. Petitioner is incarcerated and is
representing himself pro se without the assistance of counsel, which he
claims will make it difficult for him to obtain all of this information.
A federal district court has the power to extend the stay of a habeas
petition, particularly where the respondent does not oppose the extension of
the stay. See e.g. Roberts v. Norris, 415 F.3d 816, 819 (8th Cir. 2005).
Petitioner did all that he could reasonably do to file his state post-conviction
motion for relief from judgment on time, but was “prevented in some
extraordinary way” from filing the motion with the state courts on time.
Accordingly, an extension of time should be granted to Petitioner. See
Schillereff v. Quarterman, 304 F. App’x 310, 314 (5th Cir. 2008).
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that the motion for an enlargement of time to file a
post-conviction motion for relief from judgment (ECF No. 10) is GRANTED.
Petitioner has one hundred and eighty (180) days from the date of this order
to file his post-conviction motion for relief from judgment with the Genesee
County Circuit Court. 	Petitioner is still required to return to federal court
within ninety (90) days of completing the exhaustion of state court post-
Case 2:25-cv-10313-DPH-CI ECF No. 11, PageID.<pageID> Filed 11/10/25 Page 2 of 3
3
conviction remedies, should he not prevail in the state courts and file a
motion to reopen this case for further proceedings.
s/Denise Page Hood
DENISE PAGE HOOD
United States District Judge
Dated: November 10, 2025
Case 2:25-cv-10313-DPH-CI ECF No. 11, PageID.<pageID> Filed 11/10/25 Page 3 of 3

Setzen Sie Ihre Recherche in ChatGPT oder Claude fort

Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.