Opinion
No. CIV S-04-0924 LKK GGH P.
October 22, 2008
ORDER
By Order, filed on 7/29/08, the stay in this matter was lifted and respondent was directed to file an answer, after which petitioner was to file a reply/traverse, if any, within thirty days of the filing of an answer.
It was noted in the 7/29/08 (Docket #35), that petitioner's counsel had offered no explanation for having failed to comply with the court's Order imposing the stay, on 3/28/06, i.e., by failing to file a state court exhaustion petition or to communicate with this court as directed. Now the court notes that petitioner's counsel has apparently elected not to file a traverse. Petitioner has been very concerned and understandably frustrated with the manner in which his counsel has apparently dropped the ball in his case. However, this court cannot assume the work of habeas counsel.
Petitioner may take one of several options. His first option is to proceed with his present counsel. If he chooses to do so, he must so inform the court within twenty days, and this matter will be deemed submitted. His second option is to choose to proceed pro se. If he decides to proceed pro se, he may so inform the court within twenty days, after which he will be granted a 60-day extension of time to file a traverse on his own. His final option is to contact the Federal Defender's Office to determine whether the Federal Defender will seek to be substituted in as counsel on petitioner's behalf. If petitioner elects to proceed in this fashion, he must immediately contact the Federal Defender and inform the court within twenty days of the status of any such request.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that:
1. Petitioner must proceed with one of the three options set forth above;
2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of this Order upon both petitioner's present counsel, Mr. Haltom, as well as the Federal Defender's Office. The Clerk must also serve the Order upon petitioner pro se.