Owens v. Warden, Fremont Correctional Facility et al

Filing 26

ORDER denying 23 Motion for Appointment of Counsel and 24 request for the state court record, and granting 25 Motion for Extension of Time to File Answer, by Judge Lewis T. Babcock on 3/30/16.(dkals, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Senior Judge Lewis T. Babcock Civil Action No. 15-cv-01383-LTB DANTE OWENS, Applicant, v. WARDEN, Fremont Correctional Facility, and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF COLORADO, Respondents. ORDER At issue is the AMotion to Provide Applicant with Copy of the State Record,@ ECF No. 24, filed on March 28, 2016. Applicant requests the state court record so that he may Ashow where clear constitutional error has occurred and support his claims for habeas relief. See ECF No. 24. Applicant also asks for appointment of counsel. Applicant fails to assert how his request is related to any specific claim for relief. AA habeas proceeding is not a fishing expedition.@ See Teti v. Bender, 507 F.3d 50, 60 (1st Cir. 2007), cert. denied, 552 U.S. 1287 (2008). The request is broad and general, lacks the specificity to support a finding of good cause, and, therefore, will be denied. Respondents also have filed a Motion for Extension of Time to File Answer, ECF No. 25. The Motion will be granted. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Applicant=s request for the state court record, ECF No. 24, is denied for lack of specificity. It is 1 FURTHER ORDERED that Applicant=s Motion for Appointment of Counsel,@ ECF No. 23, is denied as premature. It is FURTHER ORDERED that Respondents= Motion for Extension of Time to File Answer, ECF No. 25, is granted. Respondents shall have up to and including May 2, 2016, to file an Answer. No further extension will be granted without the showing of just cause. DATED at Denver, Colorado, this 30th day of March , 2016. BY THE COURT: s/Lewis T. Babcock LEWIS T. BABCOCK, Senior Judge United States District Court 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?