ALONZO WILSON, Magistrate Judge
In response to this petition for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, the respondent was directed to state whether any of petitioner's claims which were adjudicated in state court proceedings resulted in: (1) a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States; or (2) a decision that was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the State court proceedings. See, 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d) as amended by § 104(d) of the AEDPA.
Respondent was also directed to state whether or not petitioner has rebutted by clear and convincing evidence any factual determination made by a state courts. See, 28 U.S.C. § 2254(e)(1), as amended by § 104(e) of the AEDPA.
The available evidence suggests that all of petitioner's claims were adjudicated on the merits; however, neither the petitioner nor the respondent has provided a copy of the state district court's reasons for judgment denying petitioner's application for post-conviction relief. Therefore, considering the foregoing:
IT IS ORDERED that respondent, through the District Attorney, file within THIRTY (30) days:
1. A certified copy of all documents, including all briefs or memoranda of any party, filed in connection with any application for
post-conviction relief, or writ application presented to any and all state, district courts, appellate courts or the Louisiana Supreme Court
INCLUDING A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE TRIAL COURT'S JUDGMENT AND/OR REASONS FOR JUDGMENT DENYING PETITIONER'S APPLICATION FOR POST-CONVICTION RELIEF ; and,
2. Respondent should also state whether petitioner demonstrates that any of the claims presented herein have been adjudicated in state court proceedings which resulted in: (1) a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States; or (2) a decision that was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the State court proceedings. See,
28 U.S.C. § 2254(d) as amended by § 104(d) of the AEDPA. Respondent should also state whether petitioner has rebutted by clear and convincing evidence any factual determination made by a state court and which is presumed to be correct in this proceeding. See,
28 U.S.C. § 2254(e)(1), as amended by § 104(e) of the AEDPA.