From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Beames v. Warden

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Oct 11, 2011
No. 1:10-CV-1429 AWI (E.D. Cal. Oct. 11, 2011)

Opinion

No. 1:10-CV-1429 AWI

10-11-2011

JOHN MICHAEL BEAMES, Petitioner, v. WARDEN of the California State Prison at San Quentin, Respondent.

DANIEL J. BRODERICK, Bar #89424 Federal Defender ALLISON CLAIRE, Bar #170138 Assistant Federal Public Defender TIMOTHY JOSEPH BROSNAN, Bar #75938 Attorneys for Petitioner, JOHN MICHAEL BEAMES


DANIEL J. BRODERICK, Bar #89424

Federal Defender

ALLISON CLAIRE, Bar #170138

Assistant Federal Public Defender

TIMOTHY JOSEPH BROSNAN, Bar #75938

Attorneys for Petitioner,

JOHN MICHAEL BEAMES

DEATH PENALTY CASE


AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER REGARDING BRIEFING OF EXHAUSTION ISSUES

The scheduling order filed October 4, 2011 (Document 41) is hereby amended as follows:

1. The parties shall brief the exhaustion status of Claim 11 as previously ordered - Respondent shall file his opening brief on or before October 31, 2011; Petitioner shall file his responsive brief on or before November 14, 2011; and Respondent shall file a reply brief on or before November 21, 2011;

2. Within 30 days of the submission of the Claim 11 exhaustion briefs, the parties shall meet and confer and shall submit a joint statement setting forth the positions of the parties regarding the exhaustion status of all other claims. If the parties disagree about the exhaustion status of any claims, the joint statement shall include a proposed schedule for briefing of the dispute;

3. Petitioner shall file an Opening Brief on the merits of Claim 11, including points and authorities in support of the Claim and discussion of 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d), ninety (90) days after the Court's ruling on the exhaustion status of all claims;

Respondent shall file his Answering Brief on the merits of Claim 11, including points and authorities in support of the Answer and discussion of 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d), sixty (60) days thereafter; and

Petitioner shall file a Reply thirty (30) days thereafter;

4. A status conference shall be scheduled upon conclusion of the briefing ordered above, to discuss further proceedings regarding Claim 11.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Anthony W. Ishii

Chief United States District Judge


Summaries of

Beames v. Warden

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Oct 11, 2011
No. 1:10-CV-1429 AWI (E.D. Cal. Oct. 11, 2011)
Case details for

Beames v. Warden

Case Details

Full title:JOHN MICHAEL BEAMES, Petitioner, v. WARDEN of the California State Prison…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Oct 11, 2011

Citations

No. 1:10-CV-1429 AWI (E.D. Cal. Oct. 11, 2011)