United States District Court, Eastern District of Michigan, Southern Division
ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER’S MOTION TO AMEND HIS HABEAS CORPUS PETITION
MATTHEW F. LEITMAN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Petitioner Rodney King (“Petitioner”) has filed a pro se petition for the writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 and a motion to amend the petition. The habeas petition and exhibits indicate that, following a jury trial in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, Petitioner was convicted of (1) possession with intent to distribute crack cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 841(b)(1)(B), and (2) felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). The trial court sentenced Petitioner as an armed career criminal to two concurrent terms of 264 months (twenty-two years) in prison and four years of supervised release. Petitioner alleges in his habeas petition that his sentence was improperly enhanced on the basis of two Ohio convictions for armed robbery and a Federal Youth Act conviction for bank robbery. In his motion to amend, Petitioner seeks permission to amend his habeas petition by attaching two excerpts from the Ohio Criminal Code, specifically Revised Code (R.C.) 2923.14 (“Relief from Disability”) and R.C. 2967.16 (“Final Release of Paroled Prisoners”).
Under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, A party may amend its pleading once as a matter of course within:
(A) 21 days after serving it, or
(B) if the pleading is one to which a responsive pleading is required, 21 days after service of a responsive pleading or 21 days after service of a motion under Rule 12(b), (e), or (f), whichever is earlier.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1).
On January 12, 2015, the Court ordered respondent J.A. Terris to file a response to Petitioner’s habeas corpus petition. Respondent has not filed his responsive pleading as of today’s date. Therefore, under Rule 15(a)(1)(B), Petitioner is entitled to amend his pleading as a matter of course. Accordingly, ...