Pichardo v. Dretke

Full title: RODOLFO AVILA PICHARDO, Petitioner, v. DOUGLAS DRETKE, DIRECTOR TDCJ-CID…

Court: United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Dallas Division

Date published: Apr 13, 2005

Civil Action No. 3:03-CV-0890-R (N.D. Tex. Apr. 13, 2005)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 3:03-CV-0890-R.

April 13, 2005

ORDER

JERRY BUCHMEYER, District Judge

Before this Court are Petitioner's Motion for Extention [sic.] of Time and Motion to Compel (both filed April 11, 2005). Petitioner seeks an extension of 30 days to file objections to the Findings and Recommendations of United States the Magistrate Judge (filed March 30, 2005). One of the reasons Petitioner states in support of his need for an extension is so that he may obtain a record of his outgoing mail for the months of August and September 2003 from the Dalhart Unit's mail room. Petitioner's Motion to Compel seeks, in part, this record.

From the record, it appears Petitioner may seek these records as evidence that he attempted to file a reply to Respondents' Response (filed August 6, 2003) in this case. Even if the record Petitioner seeks were to evidence such an attempt, whether Petitioner filed a reply would have no direct impact upon the result reached in the Findings and Recommendations. Accordingly, this Court does not find it necessary to grant Petitioner's Motion to Compel to allow Petitioner to object to the Findings and Recommendation.¹

1 This Court will, however, grant Petitioner an extension of time to file any objections he may have. In his objections, Petitioner may raise any matters he would have raised in any such reply.

Plaintiff's Motion to Compel additionally seeks a copy of the Respondant's [sic.] Reply to Petitioner's Habeas Corpus 11.07 C.C.P.² The Court has attached this document for the Petitioner as Exhibit A to this Order.³

2 Petitioner asserts his application for writ of habeas corpus was filed in state court on February 9, 2002. That application, however, is clearly file-stamped May 22, 2002.

3 This Court assumes Petitioner is referring to the State's (Respondent's) Response to Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed in response to the May 22, 2002 application for writ of habeas corpus.

Finally, this Court hereby grants Petitioner's request for an extension of time to object to the Findings and Recommendations. Petitioner must mail his objections with sufficient time that they may be received and filed in this Court by May 18, 2005.

It is so ORDERED.