Filed: Mar. 30, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 30, 2016
Summary: ORDER LEWIS T. BABCOCK , Senior District Judge . At issue is the "Motion to Provide Applicant with Copy of the State Record," ECF No. 24, filed on March 28, 2016. Applicant requests the state court record so that he may Ashow where clear constitutional error has occurred and support his claims for habeas relief. See ECF No. 24. Applicant also asks for appointment of counsel. Applicant fails to assert how his request is related to any specific claim for relief. "A habeas proceeding is not
Summary: ORDER LEWIS T. BABCOCK , Senior District Judge . At issue is the "Motion to Provide Applicant with Copy of the State Record," ECF No. 24, filed on March 28, 2016. Applicant requests the state court record so that he may Ashow where clear constitutional error has occurred and support his claims for habeas relief. See ECF No. 24. Applicant also asks for appointment of counsel. Applicant fails to assert how his request is related to any specific claim for relief. "A habeas proceeding is not ..
More
ORDER
LEWIS T. BABCOCK, Senior District Judge.
At issue is the "Motion to Provide Applicant with Copy of the State Record," ECF No. 24, filed on March 28, 2016. Applicant requests the state court record so that he may Ashow where clear constitutional error has occurred and support his claims for habeas relief. See ECF No. 24. Applicant also asks for appointment of counsel.
Applicant fails to assert how his request is related to any specific claim for relief. "A habeas proceeding is not a fishing expedition." See Teti v. Bender, 507 F.3d 50, 60 (1st Cir. 2007), cert. denied, 552 U.S. 1287 (2008). The request is broad and general, lacks the specificity to support a finding of good cause, and, therefore, will be denied.
Respondents also have filed a Motion for Extension of Time to File Answer, ECF No. 25. The Motion will be granted. Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that Applicant's request for the state court record, ECF No. 24, is denied for lack of specificity. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that Applicant's Motion for Appointment of Counsel," ECF No. 23, is denied as premature. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that Respondents' Motion for Extension of Time to File Answer, ECF No. 25, is granted. Respondents shall have up to and including May 2, 2016, to file an Answer. No further extension will be granted without the showing of just cause.
