Redwine v. Medina et al

Filing 26

Second Order for Answer. ORDERED that Respondents are directed to file an answer in compliance with Rule 5 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases that fully addresses the merits of exhausted claim three, the only remaining claim, within fourteen (14) days from the date of this order. FURTHER ORDERED that within thirty days of the filing of the answer Applicant, Terrence S. Redwine, may file a reply, if he desires, by Judge Lewis T. Babcock on 11/19/12. (sgrim)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 12-cv-01217-LTB-KLM
TERRENCE S. REDWINE,
Applicant,
v.
ANGEL MEDINA (Warden), and
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF [COLORADO] JOHN W. SUTHERS,
Respondents.

SECOND ORDER FOR ANSWER

On September 11, 2012, the Court entered an order (ECF No. 23) in this action
to dismiss in part and for an answer. The September 11 order specifically directed that
the answer was to be filed within thirty days of the filing of the state court record and
fully address the merits of exhausted claim three, the only remaining claim. Id. at 7.
The state record was filed on October 12, 2012 (ECF No. 25). Therefore, by the
Court’s calculations, the answer should have been filed on November 11, 2012.
According to the Court’s docketing records, no answer has yet been filed. Therefore,
Respondents will be allowed fourteen days from the date of this order in which to submit
their answer.
Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that Respondents are directed to file an answer in compliance with
Rule 5 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases that fully addresses the merits of
exhausted claim three, the only remaining claim, within fourteen (14) days from the

date of this order. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that within thirty days of the filing of the answer
Applicant, Terrence S. Redwine, may file a reply, if he desires.
DATED at Denver, Colorado, this 19th

day of

November

, 2012.

BY THE COURT:

s/Lewis T. Babcock
LEWIS T. BABCOCK, Senior Judge
United States District Court

2