Anderson v. Hornbeck

Filing 10

ORDER (SI, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/1/2010) (Additional attachment(s) added on 12/1/2010: # 1 Envelope) (tf, COURT STAFF).

Anderson v. Hornbeck

Doc. 10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JADE E. ANDERSON, Petitioner, v. TINA HORNBECK, warden, Respondent. /

No. C 10-0155 SI (pr) ORDER

Petitioner has filed a request for appointment of counsel, for an extension of time to file her traverse, and for an evidentiary hearing. The request is DENIED in part and GRANTED in part. (Docket # 9.) The request for appointment of counsel is DENIED for the reasons stated in the order to show cause, pp. 2-3, when the court denied her first request for appointment of counsel. However, the court notes that respondent has cited what appears to be an excessive number of cases ­ 72 in all ­ in a brief that only addresses three legal claims. Although the court has ready access to legal databases such as Westlaw to obtain and review the six dozen cases cited, merely obtaining those cases to read them may be unduly difficult for the incarcerated pro se petitioner. Accordingly, respondent's counsel must mail a copy of all the cases cited in her brief to petitioner no later than December 23, 2010. The request for an extension of time for petitioner to file her traverse is GRANTED. Petitioner must file and serve her traverse no later than February 4, 2011.

Dockets.Justia.com

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 27 28

The request for an evidentiary hearing is DENIED. If, after the petition is fully briefed on the merits, the court determines that an evidentiary hearing is necessary it will order one without need for a request from a party. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: December 1, 2010 SUSAN ILLSTON United States District Judge

2