Orlando v. Nassau County D.A. Office

Filing 5

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - ORDERED that the Clerk of Court serve, by electronic transmission, a copy of this Order, the underlying Petition, Petitioner's Affirmation, dated October 13, 2011, and the Exhibits annexed thereto, on the attorney for Res pondent. ORDERED that if the Petition is timely, Respondent shall prepare the state court record to be produced and filed upon the Court's request, and it is further ORDERED that no reply is required, however, should Petitioner want to reply, the reply shall be served on Respondent's counsel and filed with the Clerk of Court within thirty (30) days of receipt of the answer. So Ordered by Judge Joanna Seybert on 11/15/11. C/M; C/ECF (Valle, Christine)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
-----------------------------------X
MARK ORLANDO,
Petitioner,

MEMORANDUM & ORDER
11-CV-3992 (JS)

-againstERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN,
Respondent.
------------------------------------X
APPEARANCES:
For Petitioner:
Mark Orlando, Pro Se
05A4730
Clinton Correctional Facility
P.O. Box 2001
Dannemora, New York 12929
For Respondent:

No appearance

SEYBERT, District Judge:
Petitioner Mark Orlando (“Petitioner”), appearing pro se,
seeks a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.

By

Memorandum and Order dated September 27, 2011, Petitioner was ordered
to show cause why the Petition should not be dismissed as time-barred
by the one-year statute of limitations pursuant to the Antiterrorism
and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (“AEDPA”).

On October 24,

2011, the Court received Petitioner’s response to the Court’s Order.
Upon review of the response, and in accordance with Rule 4 of the
Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, the Court has determined that the
Petition should not be summarily dismissed.
ORDERED
transmission,

that
a

the

copy

Clerk
of

this

of

Court

Order,

the

Accordingly, it is:
serve,

by

underlying

electronic
Petition,

Petitioner’s Affirmation, dated October 13, 2011, and the Exhibits

annexed thereto, on the attorney for Respondent, Eric Schneiderman,
and it is further
ORDERED that Respondent shall file a limited answer to the
Petition, addressing the timeliness of this Petition under 28 U.S.C.
§ 2244(d) within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order with
proof of service with the Clerk of Court.
concedes

that

the

Petition

is

timely,

However, if Respondent

Respondent

shall

file

a

complete and entire answer to the Petition within sixty (60) days of
the date of this Order with proof of service with the Clerk of Court,
and it is further
ORDERED that if the Petition is timely, Respondent shall
prepare the state court record to be produced and filed upon the
Court’s request, and it is further
ORDERED

that

no

reply

is

required,

however,

should

Petitioner want to reply, the reply shall be served on Respondent’s
counsel and filed with the Clerk of Court within thirty (30) days of
receipt of the answer.
SO ORDERED.
/s/ JOANNA SEYBERT
Joanna Seybert, U.S.D.J.
Dated:

November
15 , 2011
Central Islip, New York