Opinion
2:09-cv-01202-RLH-LRL.
February 7, 2011
ORDER
This action is a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, by a Nevada state prisoner.
Respondents filed a motion for leave to file access pages (ECF No. 38), along with filing their answer (ECF No. 39). Pursuant to Local Rule 7-4, and good cause appearing, respondents' motion to file access pages in filing the answer is granted.
Petitioner has filed a motion for an evidentiary hearing and expansion of the record. (ECF No. 41). Petitioner has failed to meet the burden required for justifying an evidentiary hearing, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254(e). Therefore, the motion for an evidentiary hearing is denied. Petitioner also has failed to meet the standards for expansion of the record. Rule 7 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases; 28 U.S.C. § 2254(e); Cooper-Smith v. Palmateer, 397 F.3d 1236, 1241 (9th Cir. 2005); 28 U.S.C. § 2254(e)(2). Petitioner's motion for an evidentiary hearing and motion to expand the record (ECF No. 41) is denied.
Petitioner has filed a document entitled "quasi discovery request," which was docketed by the Clerk of Court as a motion to quash. (ECF No. 44). Petitioner asks the Court to compel respondents to send him a copy/transcript of the oral argument on his direct appeal at the Nevada Supreme Court. Petitioner has not demonstrated that respondents have a duty to produce oral argument transcripts, if they even exist. Petitioner's motion at ECF No. 44 is denied.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that respondents' motion to file excess pages (ECF No. 38) is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner's motion for an evidentiary hearing and expansion of the record (ECF No. 41) is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner's motion entitled "quasi discovery request" (ECF No. 44), is DENIED.
Dated this 7th day of February, 2011.