Barraza v. Gentry et al

Filing 23

ORDER Granting 20 Motion to Extend Time re 19 Answer to Habeas Petition. Replies due by 7/29/2016. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that 21 Motion to Appoint Counsel is DENIED. Signed by Judge Andrew P. Gordon on 3/9/16. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - TR)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

7
8

JESSICA BARRAZA,

9

Petitioner,

10

vs.

11

2:14-cv-01185-APG-PAL

J. GENTRY, et al.,

ORDER
12
13

Respondents.
_____________________________/

14
15

In this habeas corpus action, on February 9, 2016, the respondents filed an answer

16

(ECF No. 19) , responding to the remaining claims in Jessica Barraza’s habeas corpus petition.

17

Barraza’s reply to the answer is due on April 12, 2016. See Order entered December 11, 2016

18

(ECF No. 18) (60 days for reply).

19

On March 7, 2016, Barraza filed a motion for extension of time (ECF No. 20), requesting

20

that the time for her to file a reply be extended to July 29, 2016. Barraza states that the extension of

21

time is necessary because of the limited time that she, and another prisoner who is assisting her,

22

have access to a law library at the prison where they are incarcerated. The court finds that

23

Barrraza’s motion for extension of time is made in good faith and not solely for the purpose of

24

delay, and that there is good cause for the requested extension of time. The court will grant the

25

motion for extension of time.

26

1

However, given the length of this extension of time, the court will not be inclined to further

2

extend this deadline absent extraordinary circumstances. If Barraza does not file a reply by

3

July 29, 2016, the court will rule on the merits of the remaining claims in her habeas petition

4

without the benefit of a reply.

5

On March 7, 2016, Barraza also filed a motion for appointment of counsel (ECF No. 21).

6

Barraza previously requested appointment of counsel in a motion filed on July 27, 2015 (ECF

7

No. 13). The court denied that motion on August 4, 2016 (ECF No. 16). There has been no

8

significant change in circumstances with respect to Barraza’s request for appointment of counsel.

9

The court will deny Barraza’s March 7, 2016, motion for appointment of counsel for the reasons

10
11

stated in the order entered August 4, 2016 (ECF No. 16).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that petitioner’s motion for extension of time (ECF

12

No. 20) is GRANTED. Petitioner shall have until and including July 29, 2016, to file a reply to

13

respondents’ answer.

14
15
16

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner’s motion for appointment of counsel (ECF
No. 21) is DENIED.
Dated: March 9, 2016.

17
18
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

2