UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Daniel Rynne

v. Civil No. 08-cv-283-JL

Richard Gerry, Warden,

New Hampshire State Prison

O R D E R

Before the Court is Daniel Rynne’s petition for a writ of

habeas corpus (document no. 1), filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §

2254. The matter initially came before me for preliminary review

to determine whether the petition was facially valid. See Rule 4

of the Rules Governing § 2254 Cases in the United States District

Courts; United States District Court District of New Hampshire

Local Rule 4.3(d)(2) (authorizing magistrate judge to

preliminarily review pro se filings by prisoners). 

On October 21, 2008, I issued an Order directing that this

matter be stayed while Rynne returned to the state courts to

exhaust his two then-unexhausted claims. In that order, I also

found that Rynne had exhausted the claims that were the subject

Case 1:08-cv-00283-JL Document 11 Filed 06/24/09 Page 1 of 4
1These claims are numbered “1-A,” “1-B,” and “1-C” in my

October 21 Order. 

2This claim is numbered “2" in my October 21 Order.

3These claims are numbered “3" and “4" in my October 21

Order.

2

of his direct appeal1 and the claim that was the subject of his

first motion for a new trial2.

Rynne now seeks to have the stay in this matter lifted

(document no. 7). Rynne has filed documentation demonstrating

proper exhaustion of his remaining claims, presented to the state

courts in a second motion for a new trial3. Accordingly, I find

that the petition is facially valid and may proceed. See 28

U.S.C. § 2254(a) and (b) (providing that the writ “shall not be

granted” unless petitioner is in state custody and has exhausted

all available or effective state remedies). The motion to lift

the stay in this matter (document no. 7) is therefore GRANTED. 

I further direct that the petition be served upon, and

answered by, respondent. See § 2254 Rule 4. The respondent

shall file an answer or other pleading in response to the

allegations made therein. See id. (requiring reviewing judge to

order a response to the petition). The Clerk’s office is

directed to serve the New Hampshire Office of the Attorney

Case 1:08-cv-00283-JL Document 11 Filed 06/24/09 Page 2 of 4
3

General as provided in the Agreement On Acceptance Of Service,

copies of this Order and the habeas petition (document no. 1), my

October 21, 2008 Order (document no. 3), Rynne’s January 30, 3009

and April 28, 2009 status reports and attachments thereto

(document nos. 5 and 6), Rynne’s motion to lift stay (document

no. 7), and the further addenda to the petition (document no. 9)

filed in response to my May 4, 2009 Order.

Respondent shall answer or otherwise plead within thirty

(30) days of the date of this Order. The answer shall comply

with the requirements of § 2254 Rule 5 (setting forth contents of

the answer). 

Upon receipt of the response, the Court will determine

whether a hearing is warranted. See § 2254 Rule 8 (providing

circumstances under which a hearing is appropriate). 

Petitioner is referred to Fed. R. Civ. P. 5, which requires

that every pleading, written motion, notice, and similar paper, 

Case 1:08-cv-00283-JL Document 11 Filed 06/24/09 Page 3 of 4
4

after the petition, shall be served on all parties. Such service

is to be made by mailing the material to the parties’ attorneys. 

SO ORDERED. 

_________________________________

James R. Muirhead

United States Magistrate Judge

Date: June 24, 2009

cc: Daniel Rynne, pro se

Case 1:08-cv-00283-JL Document 11 Filed 06/24/09 Page 4 of 4