Lockhart v. Hedgpeth
Filing
29
ORDER LIFTING STAY; GRANTING LEAVE TO FILE AMENDED PETITION AND MOTIONS; TO SHOW CAUSE REGARDING NEW CLAIM; INSTRUCTIONS TO CLERK. Signed by Judge Jeffrey S. White on 4/9/12. (jjoS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/9/2012)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
ERIC LOCKHART,
12
13
14
15
16
Petitioner,
vs.
TONY HEDGPETH, Warden,
Respondent.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. C 08-2935 JSW (PR)
ORDER LIFTING STAY; GRANTING
LEAVE TO FILE AMENDED
PETITION AND MOTIONS; TO SHOW
CAUSE REGARDING NEW CLAIM;
INSTRUCTIONS TO CLERK
(Docket Nos. 24-27)
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Petitioner, a prisoner of the State of California, has filed a habeas corpus petition
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Respondent was ordered to show cause why the petition,
setting forth eleven claims, should not be granted. Respondent filed an answer to the
petition, and petitioner filed a traverse. Petitioner was then granted a stay in order to
exhaust his additional claims in federal court.
He has filed a motion to lift the stay, explaining that his new claim has now been
exhausted, and a motion for leave to file an amended petition that includes his newlyexhausted claim. Good cause appearing, the motion to lift the stay and the motion for
leave to file an amended petition are GRANTED. (Docket Nos. 26 and 27.) The stay is
LIFTED. The motion for an extension of time in which to file the motion to lift the stay is
also GRANTED. (Docket No. 24.) The motion for relief from judgment is DENIED as
1
2
unnecessary because there has been no judgment in this case. (Docket No. 25.)
Respondent shall file with the Court and serve on Petitioner, within sixty (60) days
3
of the issuance of this order, a supplemental answer conforming in all respects to Rule 5 of
4
the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, showing cause why a writ of habeas corpus
5
should not be granted based on Petitioner’s newly exhausted claim – the twelfth claim in
6
the amended petition. Respondent shall file with the supplemental answer and serve on
7
Petitioner a copy of any new portion of the state trial record that have been transcribed
8
previously and that are relevant to a determination of the issues presented by the amended
9
petition. If Petitioner wishes to respond to the supplemental answer, he shall do so by
10
filing a supplemental traverse with the Court and serving it on Respondent within thirty
11
(30) days of the date the answer is filed.
12
Alternatively, Respondent may file a motion to dismiss the newly-exhausted claim
13
on procedural grounds. If Respondent files such a motion, Petitioner shall file with the
14
Court and serve on Respondent an opposition or statement of non-opposition within thirty
15
(30) days of the date the motion is filed, and Respondent shall file with the Court and serve
16
on Petitioner a reply within fifteen (15) days the date the opposition is filed.
17
18
19
20
21
22
The Clerk shall lift the stay, file the amended complaint, and administratively
reopen the file.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: April 9, 2012
JEFFREY S. WHITE
United States District Judge
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
2
FOR THE
3
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
4
5
6
ERIC LOCKHART,
Plaintiff,
7
8
9
10
Case Number: CV08-02935 JSW
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
v.
TONY HEDGPETH et al,
Defendant.
/
11
12
13
14
15
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District
Court, Northern District of California.
That on April 9, 2012, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing said
copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by depositing
said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery
receptacle located in the Clerk's office.
16
17
18
Eric Lockhart V-17246
P.O. Box 290066
Represa, CA 95671-0066
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Dated: April 9, 2012
Richard W. Wieking, Clerk
By: Jennifer Ottolini, Deputy Clerk
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?