Sean Carter v. Terry Tibbals

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION
File Name: 13a0386n.06
No. 08-4377
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
SEAN CARTER,
Petitioner-Appellee,
v.
TERRY TIBBALS,
Respondent-Appellant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ON APPEAL FROM THE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT
COURT FOR THE NORTHERN
DISTRICT OF OHIO
BEFORE: MARTIN, COLE, and ROGERS, Circuit Judges
PER CURIAM. In this case the district court, finding that habeas petitioner Carter was not
competent to assist counsel, dismissed Carter’s habeas petition without prejudice. On appeal, we
amended the district court’s judgment to order instead that Carter’s petition be stayed indefinitely
with respect to any claims that required his assistance. The Supreme Court granted certiorari, held
that there is no right for a petitioner to be competent during federal habeas proceedings, vacated our
judgment, and remanded for further proceedings. Tibbals v. Carter, 133 S. Ct. 696 (2013). The
Court determined that the district court should have denied a stay with respect to three claims
adjudicated on the merits in state postconviction proceedings. Id. at 709. The Court also held that
a fourth claim, if both unexhausted and not procedurally defaulted, would not warrant an indefinite
stay, but might warrant a stay if the “claim could substantially benefit from the petitioner’s

-- 1 of 2 --

assistance,” taking “into account the likelihood that the petitioner will regain competence in the
foreseeable future.” Id.
We vacate the order of the district court and remand for further proceedings consistent with
the Supreme Court’s opinion.

-- 2 of 2 --