Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

U.S. v. WILSON, 2:08-CR-00114-TLN-AC(TEMP). (2015)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20151221863 Visitors: 5
Filed: Dec. 17, 2015
Latest Update: Dec. 17, 2015
Summary: STIPULATION AND [ PROPOSED ] ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE OBJECTIONS TO FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE ALLISON CLAIRE , Magistrate Judge . IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Benjamin Wagner, U.S. Attorney, through Assistant United States Attorney Audrey Hemesath, attorney for Plaintiff, and Heather Williams, Federal Defender, through Assistant Federal Defender Douglas Beevers, attorney for Stefan Wilson, that the deadline for filing Mr. Wilson's opposition to th
More

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE OBJECTIONS TO FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Benjamin Wagner, U.S. Attorney, through Assistant United States Attorney Audrey Hemesath, attorney for Plaintiff, and Heather Williams, Federal Defender, through Assistant Federal Defender Douglas Beevers, attorney for Stefan Wilson, that the deadline for filing Mr. Wilson's opposition to the findings and recommendations of the magistrate judge by thirty (45) days, from the current due date of December 16, 2015, to January 30, 2015. This stipulated request is made and based upon the attached Declaration of Counsel and the pleadings and papers on file in this case.

DECLARATION OF COUNSEL

1. On November 25, 2013, Mr. Wilson filed a motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Doc. 188.

2. On September 29, 2015, this Court held an evidentiary hearing to resolve issues of disputed fact regarding Mr. Wilson's ineffective assistance of counsel claim.

3. The transcripts of the evidentiary hearing were completed and filed with the Court on October 8, 2015. Doc. 250, 251.

4. Mr. Wilson submitted his post-hearing brief on October 15, 2015, Doc. 254; respondent's post-hearing brief was filed one week later on October 22, 2015, Doc. 255.

5. The findings and recommendations of the magistrate judge, recommending that Mr.Wilson's motion be denied, were signed by the magistrate judge on October 30, 2015. The findings and recommendations were entered on November 2, 2015.

6. The findings and recommendations of the U.S. Magistrate Judge is thirty-five (35) pages long, and was filed on Judge Drozd's final day as a U.S. Magistrate Judge which was only 22 days after the transcript was filed.

7. This is declarant's second request for an extension of time. Undersigned counsel has never previously filed objections to a U.S. Magistrate Judge's findings in a habeas corpus case, since his two prior habeas corpus cases were all handled by the District Judge. The Undersigned counsel anticipates no additional extensions will be needed or requested. The Objection to the Findings and Recommendation is substantially completed, however, undersigned counsel's obligations in other cases have interfered with his ability to timely complete this pleading. Undersigned counsel is attorney of record in United States v. Richard Sihner, 2:14CR 151 JAM which is a Government fraud case set for a firm jury trial on January 12, 2016, United States v. Qinghong Li 2:13CR 050 KJM which is set for a marijuana civil forfeiture jury trial on February 1, 2016, U.S. v. Clarence Redoble 2:14CR-0336 TLN which is a set for jury trial on February 29, 2016 and United States v. Gregory Chmieleweski 2:11CR084 GEB which is a complex mail fraud case set for a jury trial on February 23, 2016.

8. The extension is sought for the sole purpose of allowing undersigned counsel to fulfill his constitutional and ethical obligations to Mr. Wilson and not for delay or any other improper reason.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California and the United States that the allegations contained in this declaration are true and correct. Signed, December 15, 2015, in Sacramento, California.

ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, the Court, having received, read, and considered the parties' stipulation, and good cause appearing therefrom, adopts the parties' stipulation in its entirety as its order. It is further ordered that petitioner shall have until January 30, 2016 to file his Objections to the Findings and Recommendations of the U.S. Magistrate Judge.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer