Saenz v. Garcia

Full title: ZOSIMO REYES SAENZ, Petitioner, v. RENE GARCIA, JR., Warden, Respondent

Court: United States District Court, D. Colorado

Date published: Oct 26, 2010

Civil Action No. 09-cv-02174-MSK-BNB (D. Colo. Oct. 26, 2010)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 09-cv-02174-MSK-BNB.

October 26, 2010

ORDER

BOYD BOLAND, Magistrate Judge

This matter arises sua sponte. On April 1, 2010, I issued an order [Doc. #11] which states in part:

[T]he petitioner alleges that in violation of his due process, equal protection, and statutory rights, the respondent has wrongfully refused to place him and/or consider placing him in home confinement and community corrections confinement pursuant to the Second Chance Act, 42 U.S.C. § 17541. Application, pp. 2-5; 7-4; 12, 14-19. The respondent has addressed only the petitioner's claim for violation of his statutory rights stemming from the refusal to place him in home confinement. The respondent does not address the petitioner's claims for violations of his due process and equal protection rights, nor does he address the petitioner's claims regarding the refusal to place him and/or consider placing him in community corrections confinement pursuant to the Second Chance Act.2.

I ordered the respondent to file a supplemental brief which addresses the petitioner's claims for violations of his due process and equal protection rights regarding placement in home confinement, and his claims for violations of his due process, equal protection, and statutory rights regarding placement in community corrections confinement. The respondent filed the supplemental brief on April 16, 2010 [Doc. #14].

I also directed the petitioner to file a response to the respondent's supplemental brief. My order was mailed to the petitioner at his address of record at the Englewood Federal Correctional Institution. The envelope addressed to the petitioner was returned as undeliverable [Doc. #12].

Consequently, I ordered the petitioner to show cause why the case should be dismissed [Doc. #15]. The petitioner responded that he was still incarcerated at the Englewood Federal Correctional Institution but had not received my order to file supplemental briefing [Doc. #16]. He requests that he be allowed to file the supplemental briefing. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that the petitioner may file a response to the respondent's supplemental brief on or before November 23, 2010.

Dated October 26, 2010.