Feliz v. Sisto

Filing 21

ORDER signed by Senior Judge James K. Singleton on 8/13/09 ORDERING that further proceedings in this matter are STAYED pending the issueance of the mandate by the USCA for the Ninth Circuit in Hayward v. Marshall, 512 F.3d 536, rehg en banc granted, 527 F.3d 797 (9th Cir. 2008), Case No. 06-55392. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT, should the Petitioner be granted parole, not later than 30 days after the decision of the Board of Parole Hearings becomes effective, Respondent is directed to inform the Court of the action of the Board and the date Petitioner is scheduled to be released on parole. (Mena-Sanchez, L)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ARMANDO FELIZ, No. 2:08-cv-01508-JKS Petitioner, STAY ORDER vs. D. K. SISTO, Warden, California State Prison, Solano, Respondent. At Docket No. 19 the Court entered its Order to Show Cause why this matter should not be stayed pending the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Hayward v. Marshall, 512 F.3d 536, reh'g en banc granted, 527 F.3d 797 (9th Cir. 2008). Respondent concurred. Docket No. 20. Petitioner did not respond and the time for response has lapsed. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT further proceedings in this matter are stayed pending the issuance of the mandate by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Hayward v. Marshall, 512 F.3d 536, reh'g en banc granted, 527 F.3d 797 (9th Cir. 2008), Case No. 06-55392. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT, should the Petitioner be granted parole, not later than 30 days after the decision of the Board of Parole Hearings becomes effective, Respondent is directed to inform the Court of the action of the Board and the date Petitioner is scheduled to be released on parole. Dated: August 13, 2009. /s/ James K. Singleton, Jr. JAMES K. SINGLETON, JR. United States District Judge

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?