Rodgers v. Curry

Full title: FRANKIE L. RODGERS, Petitioner, v. BEN CURRY, et al., Respondents

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

Date published: Mar 30, 2009

No. CIV S-08-0722 WBS DAD P (E.D. Cal. Mar. 30, 2009)

Opinion

No. CIV S-08-0722 WBS DAD P.

March 30, 2009

ORDER

DALE DROZD, Magistrate Judge

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner has paid the filing fee.

Since petitioner may be entitled to relief if the claimed violation of constitutional rights is proved, respondents will be directed to file a response to petitioner's habeas petition.

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Respondents are directed to file a response to petitioner's habeas petition within sixty days from the date of this order.See Rule 4, Fed.R. Governing § 2254 Cases. An answer shall be accompanied by all transcripts and other documents relevant to the issues presented in the petition. See Rule 5, Fed.R. Governing § 2254 Cases;

2. If the response to the habeas petition is an answer, petitioner's reply, if any, shall be filed and served within thirty days after service of the answer;

3. If the response to the habeas petition is a motion, petitioner's opposition or statement of non-opposition to the motion shall be filed and served within thirty days after service of the motion, and respondents' reply, if any, shall be filed and served within fifteen days thereafter; and

4. The Clerk of the Court shall serve a copy of this order, a copy of the petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. No. 1), and the court's form regarding consent or request for reassignment on Michael Patrick Farrell, Senior Assistant Attorney General.