Breaux v. Ornoski, et al

Filing 270

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 06/17/14 ordering the parties have until 10/15/14, in which to complete all independent investigation in this case and shall by that same date submit statement(s) to the court identifying 1) which cl aims will require live testimony in an evidentiary hearing; 2) which claims will be submitted solely on the an expanded record or through deposition or affidavit; and 3) which claims will require no consideration of evidence at all. The parties may submit said statement(s) jointly or seperately. The parties shall submit no later than 11/17/14, a joint proposed schedule and status report that shall include 1) a proposed schedule for any depositions; 2) a proposed deadline for the filing of any pre-evidentiary hearing motions that either party deems appropriate; and 3) proposed dates for the evidentiary hearing. (Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

DAVID A. BREAUX,

12

Petitioner,

13
14

No. 2:93-cv-0570 JAM DAD P
DEATH PENALTY CASE

v.
WARDEN, San Quentin State Prison,

15

ORDER

Respondent.

16
Petitioner is a state prisoner incarcerated under sentence of death. He is proceeding

17
18

through counsel with an application for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254.
Under the current scheduling order, the parties had until June 16, 2014, in which to

19
20

complete all independent investigation in this case and to submit statements to the court

21

identifying which claims will require live testimony in an evidentiary hearing, which claims will

22

be submitted solely on an expanded record or through deposition or affidavit, and which claims

23

will require no consideration of evidence at all. (Doc. Nos. 257, 263.) The scheduling order

24

further requires the parties to submit no later than July 16, 2014, a joint proposed schedule and

25

status report that “shall include (1) a proposed schedule for any depositions; (2) a proposed

26

deadline for the filing of any pre-evidentiary hearing motions that either party deems appropriate;

27

and (3) proposed dates for the evidentiary hearing.” (Doc. No. 257 at 2.)

28

////
1

1

On June 16, 2014, the parties jointly submitted a stipulation informing the court that they

2

“need until October 15, 2014, to complete all independent investigation” and to submit statements

3

regarding their proposed division of claims. (Doc. 269 at 2.) The parties’ stipulation does not

4

formally ask for an extension of time to complete those tasks, but it does request that the due date

5

for the joint proposed schedule and status report, currently set at July 15, be extended to

6

November 17, 2014. The court therefore construes the parties’ stipulation as a joint motion to

7

amend the scheduling order. Good cause appearing, the requested extensions of time will be

8

granted.

9
10
11

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the scheduling order is amended as
follows:
1.

The parties have until October 15, 2014, in which to complete all independent

12

investigation in this case and shall by that same date submit statement(s) to the court identifying

13

(1) which claims will require live testimony in an evidentiary hearing; (2) which claims will be

14

submitted solely on an expanded record or through deposition or affidavit; and (3) which claims

15

will require no consideration of evidence at all. The parties may submit said statement(s) jointly

16

or separately.

17

2. The parties shall submit no later than November 17, 2014, a joint proposed schedule

18

and status report that shall include (1) a proposed schedule for any depositions; (2) a proposed

19

deadline for the filing of any pre-evidentiary hearing motions that either party deems appropriate;

20

and (3) proposed dates for the evidentiary hearing.

21

Dated: June 17, 2014

22
23

hm
brea0570.eot(6.17.14)

24
25
26
27
28
2