Lawley v. Ayers

Filing 64

ORDER RE: Supplemental Lodgement of State Record signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 01/19/2012. (Flores, E)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

7

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
DENNIS HAROLD LAWLEY,
9
10
11
12
13

)
)
Petitioner,
)
)
vs.
)
)
Michael Martel, as Acting Warden of San )
Quentin State Prison,
)
)
Respondent.
)
)

Case No. 1:08-cv-01425 LJO
DEATH PENALTY CASE
ORDER RE: SUPPLEMENTAL
LODGEMENT OF STATE RECORD

14
15

On February 25, 2009, Respondent Michael Martel, as Acting Warden of San Quentin State

16

Prison, (the “Warden”) lodged the extant state record and filed an index describing that record. Since

17

that time, further proceedings have been conducted before the California Supreme Court and additional

18

documents have been filed in Lawley’s two pending state habeas corpus actions, under case numbers

19

S163136 and S177188. Lawley has filed two motions for leave to lodge state records in this Court. The

20

first one, filed October 16, 2009 was denied as moot on October 27, 2009 after Lawley lodged records

21

on October 23, 2009. The second, filed December 16, 2011 was withdrawn.

22

It is not necessary for the parties to incrementally lodge state filings during the pendency of the

23

state proceedings. Rather, under Local Rule 191(h)(1), lodging state records and filing an index is the

24

responsibility of the Warden. Since two state habeas corpus petitions currently are pending before the

25

California Supreme Court and federal proceedings are being held in abeyance as a result of the pendency

26

of these exhaustion petitions, the Court would ask that the lodgement of further state records be delayed

27

until the two pending state petitions have been resolved. Should the California Supreme Court resolve

28

both adversely to Lawley, federal proceedings will resume.
08dp1425.OReStateRecordLodgment.Law.wpd

1

1

In that event and at that time, the Warden should supplement the lodgement and index of the state

2

record. Although the Warden need not duplicate the lodging of Lawley’s state petition and exhibits

3

previously received by the Court on October 23, 2011, those documents should be included in the

4

supplemental index. The Court anticipates the parties will collaborate without Court intervention to

5

determine which records are lodged and indexed. Communication and agreement between the parties

6

on this issue should be on-going, during pendency of the state proceedings.

7

IT IS SO ORDERED.

8

Dated:

January 19, 2012
/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill
Lawrence J. O’Neill
United States District Judge

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
08dp1425.OReStateRecordLodgment.Law.wpd

2