Campbell v. Henry

Filing 67

ORDER granting 66 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Traverse filed by Valerie E. Campbell. Traverse due by 5/4/2012.. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on 3/19/2012. (beS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/20/2012)

Case3:06-cv-02225-CRB Document66 Filed03/15/12 Page1 of 2

1
2
3
4
5
6

ERIK G. BABCOCK, SBN 172517
LAW OFFICES OF ERIK BABCOCK
1212 Broadway, Suite 726
Oakland, CA 94612
[phone] Tel.
[phone] Fax
Attorney for Petitioner
VALERIE CAMPBELL

7
8
9

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11
12

VALERIE CAMPBELL,

No. CV-06-2225 CRB

13
Petitioner-Appellant,

14
15

v.

16

APPLICATION FOR EXTENSION
OF TIME TO FILE TRAVERSE

GLORIA HENRY,

17

Respondent-Appellee.
)

18
19

I, ERIK G. BABCOCK, declare as follows:

20

1.

21

Ms. Campbell filed a pro se federal habeas petition in 2006. The court granted
respondent’s motion to dismiss on timeliness grounds. I was subsequently appointed

22
to represent her in the Ninth Circuit. The Ninth Circuit found her petition was timely
23
and remanded to this court. The court reinstated the Order the Show Cause. On

24
25

March 24, 2011 respondent filed a response to the Order to Show Cause. After a

26

couple of extensions, my traverse is due today, March 12, 2012.

27

2.

I am requesting an additional 60 days in which to file a traverse. I have exercised

28
APPLICATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIM E
Campbell v. Henry, No. 06cv2225 CRB

Case3:06-cv-02225-CRB Document66 Filed03/15/12 Page2 of 2

1
2

diligence but I am still not able to file the traverse by today, as currently scheduled.
3.

I have finished reviewing the record in this case. However, I still need to do some

3
research and writing. First I need to finish my opening brief in Clarke v. Yates, No.
4
11-15232, a state habeas with a very lengthy record in which I have received several

5
6

extension but the Ninth Circuit has indicated no further extensions should be

7

requested. I have also been involved in several other time-limited commitments,

8

including competency proceedings in a state court murder case, People v. Ying Hua

9

Wu.

10
11

4.

I have previously spoken with respondent’s counsel about this case and understood

12

him to say that he would have no objection to, or be prejudiced by, any requested

13

extensions. I left him a voicemail today about whether he objects to another but have

14

not heard from him.

15

6.

My client is currently in state custody serving a sentence of 25 to life for murder,

16
followed by two consecutive life sentences for two attempted murder convictions.
17

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 12th
day of March 2012 at Oakland, California.

21

/S Erik Babcock
ERIK G. BABCOCK
Counsel for Petitioner

22

RT

28

RDERE

OO
IT IS S

NO

27

Signed: March 19, 2012

D

R NIA

26

UNIT
ED

25

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

RT
U
O

24

S

23

. Breyer

harles R
Judge C

H

APPLICATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIM E E
RN
Campbell v. Henry, No. 06cv2225 CRB

FO

20

I therefore request approximately another 60 days, to and including May 4, 2012.

LI

19

7.

A

18

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C

- 2 -