From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kent v. Burt

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
Sep 23, 2013
CASE NO. 2:11-CV-14114 (E.D. Mich. Sep. 23, 2013)

Opinion

CASE NO. 2:11-CV-14114

2013-09-23

CHARLES STEVEN KENT, Petitioner, v. SHERRY BURT, Respondent.


HONORABLE PATRICK J. DUGGAN


ORDER DENYING PETITIONER'S MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT

Michigan prisoner Charles Steven Kent ("Petitioner") has filed a petition for the writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, in which he challenges his convictions and life sentences in 1982 for armed robbery and first-degree criminal sexual conduct. Respondent has filed an answer to the petition and the state court record. This matter is before the Court on Petitioner's motion to supplement his petition to include an August 13, 2013 polygraph examination report, which Petitioner asserts supports his claim of newly-discovered evidence and actual innocence.

Rule 7 of the Rules Governing § 2254 permits a federal habeas court to supplement the state court record with materials relevant to the resolution of the petition. Petitioner seeks to supplement his petition to place new factual material before this Court which was not a part of the state court record. The United States Supreme Court has made clear, however, that habeas review under 28 U.S.C. §2254(d) is "limited to the record that was before the state court that adjudicated the claim on the merits." Cullen v. Pinholster, - U.S. - , 131 S. Ct. 1388, 1398 (2011). Cullen thus precludes Petitioner from supplementing his petition as requested. See, e.g., Amos v. Renico, 683 F.3d 720, 728 n. 3 (6th Cir. 2012) (relying on Cullen to deny the petitioner's motion to supplement the record with information never presented to the state courts); Kirby v. Attorney General ex rel. New Mexico, No. 11-2082, 2011 WL 4346849, *11 (10th Cir. Sept. 19, 2011) (denying the petitioner's requests for expansion of the record and evidentiary hearing based upon Cullen); Atkins v. Clarke, 642 F.3d 47, 48 (1st Cir. 2011) (rejecting appeal from denial of habeas evidentiary hearing request).

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED, that Petitioner's motion to supplement is DENIED.

PATRICK J. DUGGAN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Copies to:
Charles Steven Kent, #161961
Muskegon Correctional Facility
2400 S. Sheridan Drive
Muskegon, MI 49442
AAG Andrea M. Christensen


Summaries of

Kent v. Burt

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
Sep 23, 2013
CASE NO. 2:11-CV-14114 (E.D. Mich. Sep. 23, 2013)
Case details for

Kent v. Burt

Case Details

Full title:CHARLES STEVEN KENT, Petitioner, v. SHERRY BURT, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Date published: Sep 23, 2013

Citations

CASE NO. 2:11-CV-14114 (E.D. Mich. Sep. 23, 2013)