Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Volpicelli v. Baker, 3:14-cv-00579-MMD-CBC. (2019)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20190201c23 Visitors: 16
Filed: Jan. 31, 2019
Latest Update: Jan. 31, 2019
Summary: ORDER MIRANDA M. DU , District Judge . On November 5, 2018, Respondents filed a motion for more definite statement ("Motion"). (ECF No. 59.) In their Motion, Respondents point out that Petitioner's amended petition (ECF No. 49) cites the judgment in case number CR98-2160 as the judgment of conviction Petitioner seeks to challenge but that the relevant judgment in this matter thus far has been the judgment of conviction in case number CR03-1263. In response to the Motion, Petition concedes
More

ORDER

On November 5, 2018, Respondents filed a motion for more definite statement ("Motion"). (ECF No. 59.) In their Motion, Respondents point out that Petitioner's amended petition (ECF No. 49) cites the judgment in case number CR98-2160 as the judgment of conviction Petitioner seeks to challenge but that the relevant judgment in this matter thus far has been the judgment of conviction in case number CR03-1263.

In response to the Motion, Petition concedes he made a clerical error and that he does, in fact, seek relief with respect to the judgment of conviction in CR03-1263. (ECF No. 60.)

It is therefore ordered that, with Petitioner's clarification, Respondents' motion for more definite statement (ECF No. 59) is denied as moot.

It is further ordered that Respondents will have 60 days from the date this order is entered within which to file and serve their response to Petitioner's amended petition (ECF No. 49).

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