From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Markay v. Brown

United States District Court, E.D. California
May 19, 2008
No. CIV S-02-0152 GEB GGH P (E.D. Cal. May. 19, 2008)

Opinion

No. CIV S-02-0152 GEB GGH P.

May 19, 2008


ORDER


Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding with appointed counsel, brought an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, which was denied by Order, filed on May 7, 2008, and judgment thereon entered. On May 10, 2008, counsel for petitioner filed a motion to withdraw, requesting either that new counsel be substituted in or that petitioner be substituted in pro se, as attorney of record. Therein, petitioner's counsel informed the court that, inter alia, he had provided petitioner with a draft Notice of Appeal, stating that he informed petitioner that such notice would have to be filed within thirty days of the date of judgment, or not later than June 6, 2008.

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that:

1. Petitioner's counsel must consult with petitioner forthwith and determine whether petitioner elects to proceed with an appeal, and, if so, counsel must file a timely notice of appeal on petitioner's behalf;

2. Once petitioner's counsel has either ascertained that petitioner does not seek to proceed with an appeal or, in the alternative, upon counsel's filing of a timely notice of appeal on petitioner's behalf, counsel's May 10, 2008 (# 33), motion to withdraw as counsel for petitioner will be deemed granted;

3. Should petitioner elect to proceed after the filing of a timely notice of appeal by his counsel, he will be proceeding pro se.


Summaries of

Markay v. Brown

United States District Court, E.D. California
May 19, 2008
No. CIV S-02-0152 GEB GGH P (E.D. Cal. May. 19, 2008)
Case details for

Markay v. Brown

Case Details

Full title:JEROME MARKAY, Petitioner, v. L. BROWN, et al., Respondents

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: May 19, 2008

Citations

No. CIV S-02-0152 GEB GGH P (E.D. Cal. May. 19, 2008)