Meyers v. Hedgpeth

Filing 52

AMENDED ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE Regarding Amended Petition; Amended Briefing Schedule. Habeas Answer due by 5/20/2013. Signed by Judge Thelton E. Henderson on 03/18/2013. (Attachments: # 1 Incorrect document attached see #2)(tmi, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/19/2013) (Additional attachment(s) added on 3/19/2013: # 2 Certificate/Proof of Service) (tmi, COURT STAFF).

Download PDF
1 2 3 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 6 LEON LEE MEYERS, No. C-11-5327 TEH (PR) 7 Petitioner, AMENDED ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE REGARDING AMENDED PETITION; AMENDED BRIEFING SCHEDULE 8 v. 9 ANTHONY HEDGPETH, Warden, 10 Respondent. United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 / 12 Petitioner Leon Lee Meyers has filed a pro se Petition for 13 14 15 16 a Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging a judgment of conviction from Alameda County Superior Court. He has paid the $5.00 filing fee. Doc. #1. On April 17, 2012, the Court 17 ordered Respondent, by June 17, 2012, to show cause why a writ of 18 habeas corpus should not be granted. 19 before Respondent filed his answer, Petitioner filed a motion to 20 amend his petition. 21 Granting in Part and Denying in Part the motion to amend the 22 petition. 23 Petitioner to include the following claims in his amended petition: 24 instructional error with respect to the jury instruction for 25 assault, denial of a continuance, and denial of a legal runner. 26 Court stated that the remainder of Petitioner’s proposed claims were 27 not stated with sufficient specificity and, if Petitioner wished to 28 include them in another amended petition, he must file a renewed Doc. #13. On May 1, 2012, On May 23, 2012, the Court issued an Order (Doc. #18). In the May 23, 2012 Order, the Court allowed The 1 motion to include those claims. 2 #26, Petitioner submitted his amended petition. 3 On July 27, 2012, Amended Docket In his amended petition, in addition to the claims that 4 the Court allowed in the May 23, 2012 Order, Petitioner alleges 5 other claims that he did not include in his motion to amend his 6 petition and which the Court has not addressed. 7 in the section of the petition labeled “Additional Claims.” 8 include such claims as denial of advisory counsel, denial of the 9 right to call witnesses, double jeopardy and an unconstitutional These claims appear They 10 probation violation hearing. 11 appear to be cognizable on habeas review. 12 did not include them in his motion to amend his petition, in the 13 interests of justice and judicial economy, the Court will allow them 14 to be included in the amended petition. 15 advised that, he may not add claims to his petition without leave of 16 Court to do so. Construed liberally, these claims Even though Petitioner However, Petitioner is 17 For the foregoing reasons and for good cause shown, 18 1. The Clerk shall serve by certified mail a copy of this 19 Order, the Order Granting Petitioner’s Renewed Motion for Copies and 20 the Amended Petition, (Amended Docket #26), on Respondent and 21 Respondent’s attorney, the Attorney General of the State of 22 California. 23 Petitioner. 24 2. The Clerk also shall serve a copy of this Order on Respondent shall file with the Court and serve on 25 Petitioner, within sixty (60) days of the issuance of this Order, an 26 Answer conforming in all respects to Rule 5 of the Rules Governing 27 28 2 1 Section 2254 Cases, showing cause why a writ of habeas corpus should 2 not be granted. 3 Petitioner a copy of all portions of the state trial record that 4 have been transcribed previously and that are relevant to a 5 determination of the issues presented by the Petition. 6 Respondent shall file with the Answer and serve on If Petitioner wishes to respond to the Answer, he shall do 7 so by filing a Traverse with the Court and serving it on Respondent 8 within thirty (30) days of his receipt of the Answer. 9 3. In lieu of an Answer, Respondent may file a Motion to 10 Dismiss on procedural grounds, as set forth in the Advisory 11 Committee Notes to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases. 12 If Respondent files such a motion, Petitioner shall file with the 13 Court and serve on Respondent an Opposition or Statement of 14 Non-Opposition within thirty (30) days of receipt of the motion, and 15 Respondent shall file with the Court and serve on Petitioner a Reply 16 within fifteen (15) days of receipt of any Opposition. 17 4. Petitioner is reminded that all communications with 18 the Court must be served on Respondent by mailing a true copy of the 19 document to Respondent’s counsel. 20 Court and all parties informed of any change of address. 21 Petitioner also must keep the IT IS SO ORDERED. 22 23 24 DATED 03/18/2013 THELTON E. HENDERSON United States District Judge 25 26 27 28 G:\PRO-SE\TEH\HC.11\Meyers-11-5327-AMENDED osc re am pet.wpd 3

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?