From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Walker v. Sisto

United States District Court, E.D. California
Dec 6, 2007
No. CIV S-07-1178 MCE GGH P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 6, 2007)

Opinion

No. CIV S-07-1178 MCE GGH P.

December 6, 2007


ORDER


Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On September 7, 2007, respondent filed a motion for a more definite statement. Respondent requests that petitioner be ordered to file an amended petition wherein he states each claim, describes what each claim is, and provides supporting factual information.

On September 26, 2007, petitioner filed a response to respondent's motion. Petitioner states that he "agrees to join in the motion in the interest of clarity." Response, p. 2. The court construes petitioner's response as a statement of non-opposition to respondent's motion.

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Respondent's September 7, 2007, motion for a more definite statement is granted;

2. Petitioner is granted thirty days to file an amended petition; respondent's response is due thirty days thereafter; petitioner may file a reply thirty days thereafter.


Summaries of

Walker v. Sisto

United States District Court, E.D. California
Dec 6, 2007
No. CIV S-07-1178 MCE GGH P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 6, 2007)
Case details for

Walker v. Sisto

Case Details

Full title:RICHARD WALKER, Petitioner, v. D.K. SISTO, et al., Respondents

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

Date published: Dec 6, 2007

Citations

No. CIV S-07-1178 MCE GGH P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 6, 2007)