Marshall v. Williams et al

Filing 8

ORDER Appointing Counsel and Setting Briefing Schedule. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties must send hard copies of any exhibits filed in this case to the RENO Clerk's Office. See Order for details/deadlines. Signed by Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey on 2/22/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MR)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3
4

Rodney Marshall,

5

Petitioner

6

Order Appointing Counsel and Setting
Briefing Schedule

v.

7

2:18-cv-00075-JAD-CWH

Brian Williams, et al.,

8

Respondents

9
10

I previously granted then-pro se petitioner Rodney Marshall’s motion for appointment of

11

counsel and appointed the Federal Public Defender’s Office to represent him in his request for

12

habeas corpus relief.1 C.B. Kirschner of the Federal Public Defender’s Office has now appeared

13

on Marshall’s behalf.2 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Federal Public Defender,

14

through C.B. Kirschner, is appointed as counsel for Marshall under 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B).

15

Counsel will represent Marshall in all federal proceedings related to this matter, including any

16

appeals or certiorari proceedings, unless allowed to withdraw.

17

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Marshall has until June 22, 2018, to file an

18

amended petition or seek other appropriate relief. Neither this deadline nor any extensions of

19

it may constitute an implied finding that the federal limitation period has not expired or is tolled.3

20

Marshall at all times remains responsible for calculating the federal limitation period and timely

21

asserting claims regardless of any court-ordered deadlines or extensions.

22

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondents will have 60 days from the date of

23

service of an amended petition to answer it or move to dismiss it. And Marshall will then

24

have 30 days from the date of service of an answer to reply to it. The briefing schedule for

25
1

ECF No. 4.

2

ECF No. 7.

3

See Sossa v. Diaz, 729 F.3d 1225, 1235 (9th Cir. 2013).

26
27
28

1

motions filed by either party, including a motion filed in lieu of a pleading, is governed by Local

2

Rule LR 7-2(b).

3

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any procedural defenses raised by respondents must be

4

raised together in a single, consolidated motion to dismiss. Successive motions to dismiss will

5

not be entertained, and procedural defenses embedded in the answer may be ignored. Procedural

6

defenses omitted from a single, consolidated motion to dismiss will be deemed waived.

7

Respondents may not file a response that consolidates their procedural defenses, if any, with their

8

response on the merits, except as allowed by 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b)(2) with respect to any

9

unexhausted claims clearly lacking merit. If respondents do seek dismissal of unexhausted

10

claims under § 2254(b)(2): (a) they must do so within the single motion to dismiss and not in the

11

answer; and (b) they must specifically direct their argument to the standard for dismissal under §

12

2254(b)(2) as outlined in Cassett v. Stewart, 406 F.3d 614, 623–24 (9th Cir. 2005).

13

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, in any answer filed on the merits, respondents must

14

specifically cite to and address the applicable state-court written decision and state-court record

15

materials, if any, regarding each claim within the response as to that claim.

16

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any state-court record exhibits filed by the parties must

17

be filed with an index identifying the exhibits by number. The CM/ECF attachments that are

18

filed must further be identified by the number of the exhibit in the attachment. If more exhibits

19

are filed than can fit in a single ECF number, the first document within each successive ECF

20

number must be a cover so that all exhibits are labeled as attachments. For example, if there are

21

more exhibits than can be filed as attachments to ECF No. 5, ECF No. 6 must be a cover page,

22

and the remaining exhibits would be ECF Nos. 6-1, 6-2, 6-3, etc.

23
24
25

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties must send hard copies of any exhibits
filed in this case to the RENO Clerk’s Office.
DATED: February 22, 2018.

26

_______________________________
____________________
_ ____ ___
__
___
_
U.S. District Judge Jenni A. Dorsey
. District Judge Jennifer
istr
tr
dg en
en

27
28
2