MARK ROGERS V. E.K. MCDANIEL, ET AL.

Filing 172

ORDERED that petitioner shall have until and including April 25, 2016, to file and serve a brief setting forth his position with respect to each of the issues to be addressed on the remand of this case from the court of appeals, as described in the # 167 Order entered August 25, 2015. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, in all other respects, the schedule for further proceedings in this case shall be governed by the # 167 Order entered August 25, 2015. Signed by Chief Judge Gloria M. Navarro on 3/29/2016. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6
7

MARK ROGERS,

8
9

Petitioner,

3:02-cv-00342-GMN-VPC

vs.
ORDER

10
11
12

RENEE BAKER, et al.,
Respondents.
/

13
14

In this capital habeas corpus action, the petitioner, Mark Rogers, had until March 24, 2016,

15

to file and serve a brief setting forth his position with respect to each of the issues to be addressed on

16

the remand of this case from the court of appeals, as described in the order entered August 25, 2015

17

(ECF No. 167). See Order entered November 3, 2016 (ECF No. 169). On March 24, 2016, Rogers

18

filed a motion for extension of time (ECF No. 170), requesting a second extension of time for his

19

brief on remand. Rogers requests a 30-day extension of time, to April 23, 2016; as April 23 is a

20

Saturday, the extension Rogers requests would actually be 32 days, to April 25, 2016.

21

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals remanded this case to this court for further consideration

22

of claims made by Rogers with respect to the guilt phase of his trial, in light of potentially relevant

23

cases decided while the case was on appeal. See Opinion of the Court of Appeals, July 16, 2015

24

(ECF No. 162), pp. 17-19. The court of appeals affirmed this court’s grant of habeas corpus relief to

25

Rogers regarding his death sentence. See id. at 1-16.

26

1

In an order entered August 25, 2015 (ECF No. 167), this court set a schedule for the parties

2

to brief the issues to be considered on remand. In that regard, as a first step, Rogers was granted

3

sixty days -- to October 26, 2015 -- to file and serve a brief setting forth his position with respect to

4

each of the issues to be addressed. That deadline was subsequently extended to March 24, 2016.

5

See Order entered November 3, 2016 (ECF No. 169).

6

Rogers’ counsel states that a further extension of time is necessary because of his

7

responsibilities in other cases, because of the complexity of this case, and because of personnel

8

changes at the office of the Federal Public Defender. The court finds that the motion for a second

9

extension of time is made in good faith and not solely for the purpose of delay, and that there is good

10
11
12
13

cause for the extension of time requested. The court will grant the extension of time.
However, given the amount of time that Rogers will have had to file the brief on remand, the
court will not look favorably upon any motion to further extend this deadline.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that petitioner shall have until and including

14

April 25, 2016, to file and serve a brief setting forth his position with respect to each of the issues to

15

be addressed on the remand of this case from the court of appeals, as described in the order entered

16

August 25, 2015 (ECF No. 167).

17

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, in all other respects, the schedule for further

18

proceedings in this case shall be governed by the order entered August 25, 2015 (ECF No. 167).

19
20

Dated this _____ day of March, 2016.
29

21
22
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
23
24
25
26

2