From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

FRY v. ESTEP

United States District Court, D. Colorado
Oct 4, 2006
Civil Action No. 06-cv-00568-WYD-BNB (D. Colo. Oct. 4, 2006)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 06-cv-00568-WYD-BNB.

October 4, 2006


ORDER


On August 21, 2006, Applicant filed a "Motion to Amend Habeas Application to Delete the Unexhausted Claim No. (3) (B). . . ." Respondents were directed to respond to the Motion within twenty days of the date of the Motion. Respondents now have failed to respond to the Motion within the twenty days. Therefore, I find no reason to not file the tendered Amended Application, received by the Court on August 21, 2006. Respondents again will have twenty days from the date the Amended Application is filed to respond to the Amended Application. Accordingly, it is

ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall file Applicant's tendered Amended Application, which was received by the Court on August 21, 2006. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that Respondents shall respond to Applicant's Amended Application within twenty days of the date the Amended Application is filed. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that if Respondents fail to respond to the Amended Application within twenty days the Court will rely on the Answer Respondents filed with the Court on June 5, 2006, for determining the merits of the Application. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that Applicant's "Motion for Courts [sic] Disposition Granting Habeas Relief," filed September 26, 2006, is denied as premature.


Summaries of

FRY v. ESTEP

United States District Court, D. Colorado
Oct 4, 2006
Civil Action No. 06-cv-00568-WYD-BNB (D. Colo. Oct. 4, 2006)
Case details for

FRY v. ESTEP

Case Details

Full title:ROBERT P. FRY, Applicant, v. AL ESTEP, Warden, Limon Correctional…

Court:United States District Court, D. Colorado

Date published: Oct 4, 2006

Citations

Civil Action No. 06-cv-00568-WYD-BNB (D. Colo. Oct. 4, 2006)