Cochrane v. Baker et al

Filing 4

ORDER GRANTING Petitioner's 1 Motion/Application for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. Clerk shall file and electronically serve the petition on the respondents. (Service completed 5/14/13). Respondents shall have 45 days to answer, or oth erwise respond to, petition. FURTHER ORDERED any state court record exhibits filed by respondents shall be filed with separate index. Hard copy of any additional state court record exhibits shall be forwarded, for this case, to staff attorneys in Re no. FURTHER ORDERED that, henceforth, Petitioner to serve defendants copy of every pleading, motion, or document submitted for consideration by the court. Petitioner shall include with original paper submitted for filing a certificate of mailing. See order for further details. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 05/14/2013. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KR)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 8 9 *** TERRY R. COCHRANE, Case No. 3:13-cv-00077-MMD-WGC 10 11 12 Petitioner, ORDER v. RENEE BAKER, et al., 13 Respondents. 14 15 16 This action is a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, by a Nevada state prisoner. 17 Petitioner has filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. (Dkt. no. 1.) Based 18 on the information regarding petitioner's financial status, the Court grants the motion to 19 proceed in forma pauperis. 20 The petition shall now be filed and served on respondents. A petition for federal 21 habeas corpus should include all claims for relief of which petitioner is aware. If 22 petitioner fails to include such a claim in his petition, he may be forever barred from 23 seeking federal habeas relief upon that claim. See 28 U.S.C. §2254(b) (successive 24 petitions). 25 26 27 28 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the application to proceed in forma pauperis (dkt. no. 1) is GRANTED. The Clerk of Court shall file the petition (dkt. no. 1-2). IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Clerk shall electronically serve the petition upon the respondents. 1 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondents shall have forty-five (45) days from 2 entry of this order within which to answer, or otherwise respond to, the petition. In their 3 answer or other response, respondents shall address all claims presented in the 4 petition. Respondents shall raise all potential affirmative defenses in the initial 5 responsive pleading, including lack of exhaustion and procedural default. Successive 6 motions to dismiss will not be entertained. If an answer is filed, respondents shall 7 comply with the requirements of Rule 5 of the Rules Governing Proceedings in the 8 United States District Courts under 28 U.S.C. §2254. If an answer is filed, petitioner 9 shall have forty-five (45) days from the date of service of the answer to file a reply. 10 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any state court record exhibits filed by 11 respondents shall be filed with a separate index of exhibits identifying the exhibits by 12 number or letter. The hard copy of all state court record exhibits shall be forwarded, for 13 this case, to the staff attorneys in the Reno Division of the Clerk of Court. 14 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, henceforth, petitioner shall serve upon the 15 Attorney General of the State of Nevada a copy of every pleading, motion, or other 16 document he submits for consideration by the Court. Petitioner shall include with the 17 original paper submitted for filing a certificate stating the date that a true and correct 18 copy of the document was mailed to the Attorney General. The Court may disregard 19 any paper that does not include a certificate of service. After respondents appear in this 20 action, petitioner shall make such service upon the particular Deputy Attorney General 21 assigned to the case. 22 23 DATED THIS 14th day of May 2013. 24 25 26 27 28 MIRANDA M. DU UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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?