Thompson v. Baca et al

Filing 7

ORDER re ECF No. 6 Notice of Conflict. Attorney Mark D. Eibert for Marcel D. Thompson in place and stead of attorney Megan Hoffman; show cause in writing due 2/25/2018; response due within 30 days after service; reply due within 30 days of service of response; clerk to provide counsel upon request with a single set of electronic copies of all prior filings; clerk directed to send copy of order to petitioner to address in record (mailed to P on 11/27/2017). See order for further details and instructions. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 11/27/2017., (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - LH)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

7

***

8

MARCEL D. THOMPSON,

9
10
11
12

Case No. 3:17-cv-00330-MMD-WGC
Petitioner,

ORDER

v.
ISIDRO BACA, et al.,
Respondents.

13
14

Following upon the Federal Public Defender’s notice of conflict (ECF No. 6), it is

15

ordered that the provisional appointment of the Federal Public Defender is withdrawn and

16

that Mark D. Eibert, Esq., Attorney at Law, P.O. Box 1126, Half Moon Bay, CA 94019,

17

[phone], is appointed as counsel for petitioner pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §

18

3006A(a)(2)(B). Counsel will represent petitioner in all federal proceedings related to this

19

matter, including any appeals or certiorari proceedings, unless allowed to withdraw.

20

It is further ordered that, within ninety (90) days of entry of this order, petitioner

21

must show cause in writing through counsel why the petition is not subject to dismissal

22

as a successive petition following upon the denial on the merits of petitioner’s prior federal

23

petition in No. 3:05-cv-00468-HDM-RAM.

24

It is further ordered that nothing herein forecloses petitioner from seeking other

25

appropriate relief in this Court or the Court of Appeals and/or requesting that petitioner be

26

allowed first to file a counseled amended petition prior to addressing the successiveness

27

of the petition and/or other issues. In all events, any deadline established and/or any

28

extension thereof will not signify any implied finding of a basis for tolling during the time

1

period thereof will not signify any implied finding of a basis for tolling during the time period

2

established. Petitioner at all times remains responsible for calculating the running of the

3

federal limitation period and timely presenting claims. That is, by setting a deadline and/or

4

by granting any extension thereof, the Court makes no finding or representation that the

5

petition, any amendments thereto, and/or any claims contained therein are not subject to

6

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

7

It is further ordered that respondents may file a response to petitioner’s show-

8

cause response within thirty (30) days of service and that petitioner may file a reply within

9

thirty (30) days of service of the response.

10

Following entry of Mr. Eibert as counsel of record on the docket, the Clerk of Court

11

will provide counsel, upon his request, with a single set of electronic copies of all prior

12

filings herein in a manner consistent with the Clerk’s current practice, such as

13

regeneration of notices of electronic filing.

14

The Clerk further will send a copy of this order to the petitioner in proper person at

15

the last institutional address in the record and reflect said transmittal either via the notice

16

of electronic filing or on the docket, in a manner consistent with the Clerk’s current

17

practice.

18

DATED THIS 27th day of November 2017.

19
20
MIRANDA M. DU
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2