Pittman v. Young et al
Filing
5
ORDER To File Pre-Answer Response, by Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland on 07/30/13. (nmmsl, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 13-cv-01935-BNB
EMANUEL V. PITTMAN,
Applicant,
v.
ANTHONY YOUNG,
BECKY R. LUCERO,
COLORADO BOARD OF PAROLE, and
JOHN W. SUTHERS, The Attorney General fo the State of Colorado,
Respondents.
ORDER TO FILE PRE-ANSWER RESPONSE
As part of the preliminary consideration of the Application for a Writ of Habeas
Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 in this case, the Court has determined that a
limited Pre-Answer Response is appropriate. At this time only Respondent John W.
Suthers will be directed, pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases
in the United States District Courts and to Denson v. Abbott, 554 F.Supp. 2d 1206 (D.
Colo. 2008), to file a Pre-Answer Response limited to 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 Respondent Suthers does not intend to
raise either of these affirmative defenses, he must notify the Court of that decision in the
Pre-Answer Response. Respondent Suthers may not file a dispositive motion as his
Pre-Answer Response, or an Answer, or otherwise address the merits of the claims in
response to this Order.
In support of the Pre-Answer Response, Respondent Suthers should attach as
exhibits all relevant portions of the state court record, including but not limited to copies
of all documents demonstrating whether this action is filed in a timely manner and/or
whether Applicant has exhausted state court remedies.
Applicant may reply to the Pre-Answer Response and provide any information
that might be relevant to the one-year limitation period under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)
and/or the exhaustion of state court remedies. Applicant also should include
information relevant to equitable tolling, specifically as to whether he has pursued his
claims diligently and whether some extraordinary circumstance prevented him from
filing a timely 28 U.S.C. § 2254 action in this Court. Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that the only properly named Respondent for the purpose of service
at this time is John W. Suthers, The Attorney General of the State of Colorado. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that within twenty-one days from the date of this
Order Respondent Suthers shall file a Pre-Answer Response that complies with this
Order. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that within twenty-one days of the filing of the PreAnswer Response Applicant may file a Reply, if he desires. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that if Respondent Suthers does not intend to raise either
of the affirmative defenses of timeliness or exhaustion of state court remedies, he must
notify the Court of that decision in the Pre-Answer Response.
Dated: July 30, 2013
BY THE COURT:
s/Boyd N. Boland
United States Magistrate Judge
2
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?