PALMER v. CATE, 2:11-cv-3426 GGH P. (2012)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20120606769
Visitors: 14
Filed: Jun. 05, 2012
Latest Update: Jun. 05, 2012
Summary: ORDER GREGORY G. HOLLOWS, Magistrate Judge. Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254. Respondent filed an answer on February 28, 2012, and despite being provided two extensions petitioner has not filed a traverse. However, petitioner filed a motion to stay on May 2, 2012, in order to exhaust new claims he states he recently discovered. Within 14 days, respondent shall file an opposition to the motion to st
Summary: ORDER GREGORY G. HOLLOWS, Magistrate Judge. Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254. Respondent filed an answer on February 28, 2012, and despite being provided two extensions petitioner has not filed a traverse. However, petitioner filed a motion to stay on May 2, 2012, in order to exhaust new claims he states he recently discovered. Within 14 days, respondent shall file an opposition to the motion to sta..
More
ORDER
GREGORY G. HOLLOWS, Magistrate Judge.
Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Respondent filed an answer on February 28, 2012, and despite being provided two extensions petitioner has not filed a traverse. However, petitioner filed a motion to stay on May 2, 2012, in order to exhaust new claims he states he recently discovered. Within 14 days, respondent shall file an opposition to the motion to stay or indicate if there is no opposition.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
