Calabaza v. Gleason

Filing 7

SECOND ORDER TO FILE SUPPLEMENT RESPONSE by Magistrate Judge Gordon P. Gallagher on 3/29/16. (dkals, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 16-cv-00499-GPG

MYLES CALABAZA,
Petitioner
v.
CHIEF IGNACIO ADULT JUSTICE CENTER, and
CAPTAIN GLEASON, Superintendent,
Respondents.

SECOND ORDER TO FILE SUPPLEMENT RESPONSE

The Court is entering a Second Order to File Supplement Response, because
Respondent has failed to acknowledge or comply with the original Order to File
Supplement Response, which was entered on the Docket on March 1, 2016.
Respondent was to have filed a Supplement by March 22, 2016. As of the date of this
Order, the Court has not received a Supplement. The Respondent will be directed again
to comply. Copies of this Order and the March 1, 2016 Order will be copied to the United
States Attorney’s Offices for the District of Colorado and the District of New Mexico.
It appears that Petitioner Myles Calabaza remains incarcerated at the Chief
Ignacio Adult Detention Center in Towaoc, Colorado. Petitioner originally filed a Petition
Under 25 U.S.C. ' 1303 for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in Tribal Custody, ECF
No. 3, in the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico, and he was
granted leave to proceed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, ECF No. 1-6. On February 18,
2016, the District of New Mexico ordered the ' 1303 Petition transferred to this Court.
ECF No. 1. The District of New Mexico found the transfer proper because the Apower to

1

grant the writ falls under 28 U.S.C. ' 2241@ and A[w]rits of habeas corpus may be granted
by . . . the district courts . . . within their respective jurisdictions.@ Id. The District of
New Mexico also determined that a transfer is proper because Petitioner is challenging
his present physical detainment in Towaoc, Colorado, and has named respondents who
are located in Colorado.

Id.

Upon review of the docket for this case in the District of New Mexico, the Court
finds that on December 30, 2015, the United States Attorney for the District of New
Mexico filed a Response to the ' 1303 Petition and addressed the nonstatutory
exhaustion requirement that normally applies to trial court authority and who is the
properly named respondent in this case. See ECF No. 17. This Court, therefore, will
direct either the United States Attorney for the District of New Mexico or the United States
Attorney for the District of Colorado to supplement the December 30, 2015 Response, as
needed to address new events, and then if Petitioner desires he may reply to the
December 30 Response and ordered supplement. Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that within fourteen days from the date of this Order the United
States Attorney for the District of New Mexico, as identified in ECF No. 1-18, or the United
States Attorney for the District of Colorado shall supplement the December 30, 2015
Response in compliance with this Order. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall send a copy of this Order
and the Order entered on March 1, 2016, ECF No. 6, to the United States Attorney’s
Office for the District of Colorado; to Jeremy Pena, United States Attorney’s Office for the
District of New Mexico, at [e-mail]; and to David Adams,
[e-mail].

It is

2

FURTHER ORDERED that within twenty-one days of the filing of the
Response Applicant may file a Reply, if he desires.
Dated: March 29, 2016
BY THE COURT:
s/Gordon P. Gallagher
United States Magistrate Judge

3