Court-Martial Trial Practice Blog
Timothy Hennis filed this pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Mr. Hennis is confined at the United States Disciplinary Barracks in Fort Leavenworth, Kansas (“USDB”). He challenges his 2010 conviction by general court-martial for a triple murder that occurred in 1985. Petitioner mainly claims that the military court-martial lacked jurisdiction. He alleges other constitutional violations in the 14 grounds presented in his petition. The Court has screened the petition and finds that Mr. Hennis had not exhausted military court remedies. The Court dismisses this action without prejudice for failure to exhaust.
Hennis v. Nelson.
A good recitation of habeas for military accused’s and prisoners. Of note:
Mr. Hennis filed the instant petition pro se and has not sought appointment of counsel. In fact, he expresses his intent to litigate this federal habeas petition pro se and even his desire to manage his defense during his military criminal appeals.
Mr. Hennis is currently represented by multiple counsel on his military direct appeals. He unwisely seeks to simultaneously litigate the exact same claims in federal civilian court while representing himself. The Court strongly urges Mr. Hennis to consult with his military defense team as to all matters having to do with his military convictions and sentence and to discuss with them all possible defenses and concerns. Any claim of ineffective assistance of counsel must be exhausted in the military courts. Mr. Hennis should carefully consider the pitfalls he has already encountered in this pro se attempt to prematurely assert his claims in civilian federal court. Even if he continues to believe that he is more capable to argue the facts of his case than any of his attorneys, he is strongly urged to take full advantage of the expertise and resources of his defense team.