Whalen v. Warden of San Quentin

Filing 36

ORDER (1) Referring Petitioner's 30 Motion for Equitable Tolling to District Judge, and (2) Vacating Hearing Set for September 9, 2015 at 10:00 a.m. in Department 9 signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 08/19/2015. (Flores, E)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DANIEL LEE WHALEN, 12 13 14 15 Case No. 1:14-cv-01865-LJO-SAB Petitioner, DEATH PENALTY CASE ORDER (1) REFERRING PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR EQUITABLE TOLLING TO DISTRICT JUDGE, and (2) VACATING HEARING SET FOR SEPTEMBER 9, 2015 AT 10:00 A.M. IN DEPARTMENT 9 v. WARDEN, California State Prison at San Quentin, Respondent. 16 (ECF No. 30) 17 18 On August 3, 2015, Petitioner filed a motion to equitably toll the 28 U.S.C. § 2244 19 limitations period for filing his federal habeas petition from November 12, 2015 to February 2, 20 2016, due to delay in appointing counsel and case complexity. Respondent filed opposition on 21 August 12, 2015. Petitioner’s reply, if any, is due not later than September 2, 2015. Local 22 Rule 230(d). 23 In the interest of judicial economy, the undersigned finds it is more appropriate for 24 District Judge Lawrence O’Neill to address the motion. 25 Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that: 26 27 28 1 1. 1 The previously scheduled hearing set for September 9, 2015 at 10:0 a.m. before 2 the undersigned is vacated and the parties will not be required to appear at that 3 time, 2. 4 Petitioner’s motion for equitable tolling (ECF No. 30) is referred to District 5 Judge Lawrence O’Neill and the parties will be notified by minute order if a 6 hearing is necessary, and 3. 7 Petitioner’s reply, if any, shall be filed by not later than September 2, 2015. 8 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. 10 Dated: August 19, 2015 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?