Secrease v. Walker

Filing 19

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge John F. Moulds on 2/4/09 ORDERING respondents to file an answer to 1 , 2 , 11 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus w/in 45 days; traverse due w/in 30 days of answer; and clerk to serve a copy of this order along w/ Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and a copy of the form re consent or reassignment on Michael Patrick Farrell. (cc: Michael Farrell) (Yin, K)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 vs. JAMES WALKER, Warden, Respondent. / Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding through counsel, has filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner has paid the filing fee. Since petitioner may be entitled to the requested relief if the claimed violation of constitutional rights is proved, respondents will be directed to file a response to petitioner's application. In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. Respondents are directed to file an answer within forty-five days from the date of this order. See Rule 4, Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases. Respondents shall include with the answer any and all transcripts or other documents relevant to the determination of the issues presented in the application. Rule 5, Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases; ///// 1 ORDER IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SHANNON SECREASE, Petitioner, No. 2:09-cv-0299 JFM (HC) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 /mp; 001 secr0299.100f 2. Petitioner's traverse, if any, is due on or before thirty days from the date respondents' answer is filed; 3. The Clerk of the Court shall serve a copy of this order together with a copy of petitioner's application for writ of habeas corpus and an Order Re Consent or Request for Reassignment on Michael Patrick Farrell, Senior Assistant Attorney General. DATED: February 4, 2009. 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?