Stinson v. Sisto

Filing 45

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO SERVE RESPONDENT WITH ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND PETITIONER'S RESPONSE THERETO (DOCKET NOS. 43 & 44); SCHEDULING REPLY. The Court hereby DIRECTS the Clerk of the Court to serve respondent with a copy of the order t o show cause and petitioner's response. (Docket Nos. 43 & 44 ). Respondent shall file a reply to the response within twenty (20) days of the date this order is filed. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on July 9, 2009. (mmcsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/9/2009) Modified on 7/10/2009 (aaa, COURT STAFF).

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA EDWARD G. STINSON, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) ) D.K. SISTO, Warden, ) ) Respondent. ) ______________________________ ) No. C 06-3585 MMC (PR) ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO SERVE RESPONDENT WITH ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND PETITIONER'S RESPONSE THERETO (DOCKET NOS. 43 & 44); SCHEDULING REPLY United States District Court 11 For the Northern District of California 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 On August 8, 2006, petitioner, a California prisoner then incarcerated at Solano State Prison and proceeding pro se, filed an amended petition in the above-titled habeas corpus action, alleging that the revocation of his probation, on October 27, 2003, and the three-year sentence imposed by the trial court as a result thereof, violated his federal constitutional rights. He sought release from custody. By order filed June 8, 2009, the Court ordered petitioner to show cause why the petition should not be dismissed as moot, in light of the fact that petitioner no longer is incarcerated and, consequently, might no longer be serving the sentence imposed when probation was revoked. Further, the Court ordered respondent to file a reply to the response within fifteen days of the date the response was filed. (Order, filed June 8, 2009, at 3:4-9.) Petitioner filed his response to the order to show cause on June 16, 2009. Although more than fifteen days have passed, respondent has not filed a reply. The Court has learned, however, that respondent was not served with either a copy of the Court's order to show cause or petitioner's response thereto. Accordingly, in the interest of the efficient resolution 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 of this matter, the Court hereby DIRECTS the Clerk of the Court to serve respondent with a copy of the order to show cause and petitioner's response. (Docket Nos. 43 & 44). Respondent shall file a reply to the response within twenty (20) days of the date this order is filed. The matter shall be deemed submitted as of the date the reply is due. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: July 9, 2009 _________________________ MAXINE M. CHESNEY United States District Judge United States District Court 11 For the Northern District of California 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?