United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Orlando Division
RODNEY L. HURD, Petitioner,
SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, et al., Respondents.
B.DALTON JR. United States District Judge
case is before the Court on the following matters:
Respondents have filed a Response to this Court's Order
to Show Cause. (Doc. 14). The Court directed Respondents to
show cause why sanctions should not be imposed for
misrepresenting that they conferred with counsel and for
failing to comply with the Court's November 16, 2016
Order. (Doc. 13 at 1). In response to the Order, Respondents
assert that the misrepresentation was inadvertent and that
they completed and mailed Petitioner a copy of the Response
to Petition as directed in the November 16, 2016 Order and
thought they had filed it with the Court but discovered it
had not been filed after the show cause order issued. (Doc.
14 at 1-2). Respondents further filed the Response to
Petition. (Doc. 15). While the Court is quite concerned about
the misrepresentation of conferral with counsel, and the
nonchalance reflected in the explanation, in light of
Respondents' representations and filing of the Response
to Petition, the Court will take no further action on the
Order to Show Cause. Therefore, the Order to Show Cause (Doc.
13) is DISCHARGED.
Respondents filed a Response to Petition (the
“Response”) (Doc. 15), requesting that the Court
deny the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (the
“Petition”) (Doc. 1). Petitioner is advised out
of an abundance of caution that the denial of the Petition at
this stage would represent a final adjudication of this case
which may foreclose subsequent litigation on the matter.
Petitioner shall have sixty (60) days from the date of this
Order to file a Reply to the Response. Upon the expiration of
this time, the Petition, the Response, and the Reply, if one
is filed, will be taken under advisement by the Court, and an
order will be entered without further notice.