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