Vaughn v. Ward

Background

Gerald Vaughn, proceeding without a lawyer, filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging his state-law convictions for attempted gang assault in the first degree, attempted assault in the first degree, and assault in the second degree. The court ordered respondent Joseph Ward, Superintendent of Marcy Correctional Facility, to file an answer and the transcripts and briefs identified in the rules governing federal petitions challenging state convictions.

Ward instead filed a motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) and 28 U.S.C. §§ 2254(b) and (c). The motion argued that Vaughn had failed to exhaust his claims, meaning that he had not first presented them through the required state-court process. Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox recommended denying the motion and directing Ward to comply with the court’s order to answer. Ward objected.

Court’s Analysis

The district court reviewed Ward’s objections for clear error because they were general objections that repeated his earlier arguments. The court explained that Rule 5 of the rules governing Section 2254 cases ordinarily does not require an answer unless a judge orders one. Here, however, the court had specifically issued an “Order to Answer” directing Ward to file an answer and supporting materials within 60 days.

The court acknowledged that district judges may sometimes permit a motion or another response instead of an answer in a federal petition challenging a state conviction. But this court had not authorized that approach in this case. Judge Fox therefore did not err by declining to consider Ward’s motion to dismiss. The court did not reach the merits of Ward’s exhaustion argument or Vaughn’s underlying petition claims. It also declined to address Ward’s additional objections concerning the description of Vaughn’s claims, an exhibit, and compliance with a local rule because those issues were ancillary to the ruling.

Disposition

The court adopted the Report and Recommendation and denied Ward’s motion to dismiss. The clerk was directed to terminate the motion and mail the order to Vaughn. Ward was ordered to file and serve an answer, the required transcripts, and briefs within 60 days of the order. Vaughn could file reply papers within 60 days after being served with Ward’s answer.