Opinion
Civil Action No. 11-cv-02011-BNB
01-24-2012
MR. TONEY L. BROWN, Applicant, v. JOHN CHAPDELINE, and JOHN SUTHERS, Attorney General of the State of Colorado, Respondents.
ORDER TO FILE SUPPLEMENT TO PRELIMINARY RESPONSE
As part of the preliminary consideration of the Application for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 filed on August 3, 2011, the Court ordered Respondents to file a Pre-Answer Response limited to addressing the affirmative defenses of timeliness under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d) and/or exhaustion of state court remedies. On November 17, 2011, Respondents filed a Pre-Answer Response and on January 18, 2012, Applicant filed a reply to the Pre-Answer Response.
Respondents argue in the Pre-Answer Response that the application is barred by the one-year limitation period in 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d) and that Applicant's claims are unexhausted and procedurally barred. Applicant raises a number of arguments in his reply regarding statutory and equitable tolling of the one-year limitation period and exhaustion of state remedies that Respondents have not had an opportunity to address. Therefore, Respondents will be directed to file a supplement to the Pre-Answer Response that addresses the arguments Applicant raises in his reply if Respondents wish to respond to those arguments. Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that within twenty-one (21) days from the date of this Order Respondents shall file a supplement to the Pre-Answer Response that complies with this Order if Respondents wish to respond to the arguments Applicant raises in his reply. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that within twenty-one (21) days of the filing of any supplement to the Preliminary Response Applicant may file a Reply to the supplement, if he desires.
BY THE COURT:
Boyd N. Boland
United States Magistrate Judge