Dykes v. Ayers
Filing
64
ORDER REGARDING PETITIONER'S REQUEST TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE JOINT STATEMENT 62 . (Illston, Susan) (Filed on 8/24/2018)
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
2
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
3
4
ERNEST EDWARD DYKES,
Case No. 11-cv-04454-SI
Petitioner,
5
v.
ORDER REGARDING PETITIONER’S
REQUEST TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE
JOINT STATEMENT
6
7
RON DAVIS, Warden of California State
Prison at San Quentin,
8
Respondent.
Re: Dkt. No. 62
9
Petitioner has filed a second request to extend by 60 days the time to file a joint statement
11
United States District Court
Northern District of California
10
outlining a litigation schedule for the adjudication of his capital habeas petition. Petitioner asserts
12
that he needs additional time so that he may pursue a proposed settlement of his case. Petitioner
13
notes that he is awaiting third-party input relating to claim 1 of his petition, which alleges that the
14
death penalty is disproportionate to his culpability.
15
Respondent opposes petitioner’s request. He asserts that the resolution of the habeas
16
petition has already been significantly delayed, that petitioner has declined to work with
17
respondent on a joint statement and the nature of the settlement sought by petitioner is unclear.
18
Respondent further notes that because resolution of claim 1 has been stayed by this Court, the
19
parties may proceed to resolve the remainder of petitioner’s claims. Finally, respondent requests
20
that if this Court were inclined to grant an extension, to do so only until September 10, 2018, as
21
respondent’s counsel will be on leave from September 17 through October 15, 2018.
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Having reviewed the parties’ contentions, the Court grants an extension until September
10, 2018 for the filing of a joint statement. No further extensions are anticipated.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: August 24, 2018
______________________________________
SUSAN ILLSTON
United States District Judge
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?