BREAUX v. WARDEN, SAN QUENTIN STATE PRISON, 2:93-cv-0570-JAM-EFB P (TEMP). (2016)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20160106855
Visitors: 18
Filed: Jan. 05, 2016
Latest Update: Jan. 05, 2016
Summary: ORDER EDMUND F. BRENNAN , Magistrate Judge . Petitioner is a state prisoner incarcerated under sentence of death. He is proceeding through counsel with an application for writ of habeas corpus. Respondent has filed a motion for extensions of time in which to comply with the current scheduling order. Counsel for respondent states that counsel for petitioner does not oppose the proposed extensions. Therefore, good cause appearing, the motion will be granted. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERE
Summary: ORDER EDMUND F. BRENNAN , Magistrate Judge . Petitioner is a state prisoner incarcerated under sentence of death. He is proceeding through counsel with an application for writ of habeas corpus. Respondent has filed a motion for extensions of time in which to comply with the current scheduling order. Counsel for respondent states that counsel for petitioner does not oppose the proposed extensions. Therefore, good cause appearing, the motion will be granted. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED..
More
ORDER
EDMUND F. BRENNAN, Magistrate Judge.
Petitioner is a state prisoner incarcerated under sentence of death. He is proceeding through counsel with an application for writ of habeas corpus.
Respondent has filed a motion for extensions of time in which to comply with the current scheduling order. Counsel for respondent states that counsel for petitioner does not oppose the proposed extensions. Therefore, good cause appearing, the motion will be granted.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion for extensions of time (Doc. No. 288) is granted. The current scheduling order (Doc. No. 286) is amended as follows:
1. The parties have until March 7, 2016, in which to complete all independent investigation in this case.
2. The parties shall submit no later than March 7, 2016, a joint proposed schedule and status report that shall include: (1) a proposed schedule for any depositions; (2) a proposed deadline for the filing of any pre-evidentiary hearing motions that either party deems appropriate; and (3) proposed dates for the evidentiary hearing.
Source: Leagle
