Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Workman v. Baca, 3:17-cv-00508-MMD-CLB. (2020)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20200226c06 Visitors: 3
Filed: Feb. 25, 2020
Latest Update: Feb. 25, 2020
Summary: ORDER MIRANDA M. DU , Chief District Judge . Before the Court are several motions in this pro se 28 U.S.C. 2254 habeas corpus matter. In Petitioner William Workman's motion for a decision he complained that Respondents had not yet filed an answer to the petition; however, Respondents had sought an extension of time to file an answer. In what Workman styled as a motion for relief (ECF No. 50), he basically asks the Court for clarification regarding the status of his petition. The petitio
More

ORDER

Before the Court are several motions in this pro se 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus matter. In Petitioner William Workman's motion for a decision he complained that Respondents had not yet filed an answer to the petition; however, Respondents had sought an extension of time to file an answer. In what Workman styled as a motion for relief (ECF No. 50), he basically asks the Court for clarification regarding the status of his petition. The petition is briefed and will be adjudicated on the merits in due course.

It is therefore ordered that Respondents' first and second motions for extension of time to file a response to the petition (ECF Nos. 44, 46) are both granted nunc pro tunc.

It is further ordered that Petitioner's motion for a decision and motion for relief (ECF Nos. 45, 50) are both denied as set forth in this order.

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