- 1 - 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION

CORRINE BAKER, 

 Petitioner, Civil No. 2:15-CV-11629 

 HON. GEORGE CARAM STEEH 

v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

ANTHONY STEWART, 

 

 Respondent. 

______________________/ 

OPINION AND ORDER: (1) GRANTING MOTION TO REINSTATE 

THE HABEAS PETITION (Dkt. # 18) AND ORDERING THE CLERK OF 

THE COURT TO REOPEN THE CASE TO THE COURT’S ACTIVE 

DOCKET, (2) GRANTING THE MOTION TO AMEND THE PETITION 

FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS, (3) DIRECTING THAT THE 

AMENDED PETITION (Dkt. ## 14-17) BE SERVED UPON THE 

RESPONDENT AND THE MICHIGAN ATTORNEY GENERAL, AND 

(4) DIRECTING RESPONDENT TO FILE AN ANSWER AND 

ANY ADDITIONAL RULE 5 MATERIALS IN THIS CASE 

Petitioner filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 

U.S.C. § 2254, which was held in abeyance to permit Petitioner to return to 

the state courts to exhaust additional claims. 

Petitioner has filed an amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus, 

which is construed as a motion to reopen the case and to amend the 

habeas petition. The motion is GRANTED. The Clerk of the Court shall 

reopen the case and serve a copy of the amended petition for a writ of 

habeas corpus upon respondent and the Michigan Attorney General’s 
- 2 - 

Office. Respondent shall file an answer and any additional Rule 5 

materials within ninety (90) days of the Court’s order. 

Federal courts have the power to order that a habeas petition be 

reinstated upon timely request by a habeas petitioner, following the 

exhaustion of state court remedies. See e.g. Rodriguez v. Jones, 625 F. 

Supp. 2d 552, 559 (E.D. Mich. 2009). Petitioner alleges in her amended 

petition that her claims were exhausted with the state courts. The case is 

reopened. 

Petitioner’s proposed amended habeas petition should be granted

because it advances claims that may have arguable merit. See e.g. Braden 

v. United States, 817 F.3d 926, 930 (6th Cir. 2016). 

The Clerk of the Court shall serve a copy of the amended petition for a 

writ of habeas corpus [Dkt. ## 14-17] and a copy of this Order on Respondent 

and on the Attorney General for the State of Michigan as provided in Rule 4 

of the Rules Governing § 2254 Cases, Rule 4. See Coffee v. Harry, No. 04-

71209, 2005 WL 1861943, *2 (E.D. Mich. Aug. 2, 2005). Respondent shall 

file an answer to the amended petition within ninety days of the Court’s order. 

See Erwin v. Elo, 130 F. Supp. 2d 887, 891 (E.D. Mich. 2001); 28 U.S.C. § 

2243. Respondent shall provide any additional Rule 5 materials with the 

answer. See Griffin v. Rogers, 308 F.3d 647, 653 (6th Cir. 2002); Rules 
- 3 - 

Governing § 2254 Cases, Rule 5, 28 U.S.C. foll. § 2254.1 Petitioner has 

forty five (45) days from the receipt of the answer to file a reply brief, if she 

so chooses. See Rule 5(e) of the Rules Governing § 2254 Cases, 28 U.S.C. 

foll. § 2254. 

ORDER 

IT IS ORDERED THAT: 

(1) The motion to reinstate the petition is GRANTED. The 

Clerk of the Court shall reopen the habeas petition to the 

Court’s active docket. 

 

(2) The motion to amend the petition for writ of habeas corpus is 

GRANTED. 

(3) The Clerk of the Court shall serve a copy of the amended 

petition for a writ of habeas corpus [Dkt. ## 14-17] and a copy

of this Order on Respondent and the Attorney General. 

(4) Respondent shall file an answer and any additional Rule 5 

materials within ninety (90) days of the date of this order or 

show cause why they are unable to comply with the order. 

(5) Petitioner shall have forty five (45) days from the date that 

she receives the answer to file a reply brief. 

Dated: October 2, 2019 

 s/George Caram Steeh 

 GEORGE CARAM STEEH 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

 

1 Respondent already filed some Rule 5 materials in this case and would therefore only be required to file 

any additional Rule 5 materials from petitioner’s state post-conviction proceedings or any other Rule 5 

materials which have already not been provided. 
- 4 - 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

Copies of this Order were served upon attorneys of record on 

October 2, 2019, by electronic and/or ordinary mail. 

s/Marcia Beauchemin 

Deputy Clerk