UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

LARRY DEVEL STEWART, 

Petitioner, 

v. Case No. 15-11843 

Hon. Terrence G. Berg 

TONY TRIERWEILER, 

Respondent. 

OPINION AND ORDER ON REMAND REOPENING THE 

PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS TO THE 

COURT’S ACTIVE DOCKET, AMENDING CAPTION, AND 

SETTING DEADLINES FOR THE PARTIES TO FILE 

SUPPLEMENTAL PLEADINGS 

Larry Devel Stewart, (“Petitioner”), presently at the Bellamy 

Correctional Facility in Ionia, Michigan, filed a pro se petition for 

writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging 

his convictions for first-degree felony murder, armed robbery, 

conspiracy to commit armed robbery, and felony-firearm. This 

Court1 conditionally granted Petitioner a writ of habeas corpus on 

his prosecutorial misconduct and Sixth Amendment right to 

confrontation claims, while declining to address his other claims. 

Dkt. 9 at Pg ID 1326. 



1 This case was previously assigned to the Honorable Gerald E. 

Rosen, formerly Chief Judge, now retired. 
2 

Respondent appealed to the Sixth Circuit, which reversed 

and remanded for further proceedings addressing Petitioner’s 

remaining claims that: 1) the prosecution violated his Fifth 

Amendment rights by mentioning his post-Miranda silence; 2) 

there was insufficient evidence to support his convictions for 

conspiracy to commit armed robbery and first-degree felony 

murder; 3) the court failed to instruct the jury on a lesser included 

offense; and 4) his defense counsel was ineffective. Dkt. 19 at Pg 

ID 1455, 1463. 

The Sixth Circuit entered its mandate on November 14, 2017 

and the case was reassigned on November 16, 2017. 

 Federal courts have the power to order that a habeas 

petition be reinstated in various contexts. See e.g. Rodriguez v. 

Jones, 625 F. Supp. 2d 552, 559 (E.D. Mich. 2009). The Court will 

therefore reopen the petition to adjudicate petitioner’s remaining 

claims. 

 The Court will also amend the caption to reflect that the 

proper Respondent in this case is now Petitioner’s current warden, 

Tony Trierweiler. See Edwards Johns, 450 F. Supp. 2d 755, 757 

(E.D. Mich. 2006).

 Petitioner is granted ninety (90) days from the date of this 

order to file any supplemental brief that he wishes to submit in 
3 

support of his remaining claims. Respondent shall have sixty (60) 

days after the filing of any supplemental brief by Petitioner (or 

after the expiration of the ninety-day period) to file a response 

brief, if he so chooses.

ORDER 

 The Court orders that: 

(1) The case is REOPENED to the Court’s Active Docket. 

(2) The case caption is amended. 

(3) Petitioner is GRANTED ninety (90) days from the 

date of this order to file any supplemental brief that 

he may wish to submit in support of his remaining 

claims. Respondent shall than have sixty (60) days 

after the filing of any supplemental brief by 

Petitioner or the expiration of the ninety-day period 

to do so to file a response brief, if he so chooses. 

SO ORDERED. 

Dated: December 21, 2017 s/Terrence G. Berg 

TERRENCE G. BERG 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 
4 

Certificate of Service

I hereby certify that this Order was electronically filed, and the parties 

and/or counsel of record were served on December 21, 2017. 

 s/H. Monda 

 Case Manager, 

in the absence of A. Chubb