Guice v. Davis et al

Filing 13

ORDER to Supplement Pre-Answer Response, by Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland on 8/06/2013. (skl)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 13-cv-01134-BNB
DARREL GUICE,
Applicant,
v.
JOHN DAVIS, Warden, and
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL STATE OF COLORADO,
Respondents.

ORDER TO SUPPLEMENT PRE-ANSWER RESPONSE

On June 4, 2013, the Court directed the Respondents to file a Pre-Answer
Response addressing the affirmative defenses of timeliness under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)
and/or exhaustion of state court remedies under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b)(1)(A), if
Respondents intended to raise these defenses. On June 25, 2013, Respondents filed a
Pre-Answer Response raising the defense of failure to exhaust state court remedies.
Applicant contends that exhaustion should be excused because of an inordinate delay
by the state appellate court in processing his direct appeal. According to the exhibits
attached to the Pre-Answer Response, Applicant had not yet filed his direct appeal
opening brief at the time the Pre-Answer response was filed because the record on
appeal was incomplete. Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that on or before August 20, 2013, Respondents shall file with the
Court a Supplement to the Pre-Answer Response, along with any relevant exhibits,
indicating the date on which Applicant’s opening brief was filed in the Colorado Court of

Appeals and otherwise reporting on the status of Applicant’s direct appeal.
Dated August 6, 2013, at Denver, Colorado.

BY THE COURT:
s/ Boyd N. Boland
United States Magistrate Judge

2