Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_01-cv-03502/USCOURTS-cand-3_01-cv-03502-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

United ForSta the Ntes orther Di n Distr striict oct Cf Califor ouniart

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United ForSta the Ntes orther Di n Distr striict oct Cf Califor ouniart

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DAVID MICHAEL GRAVES,

Petitioner,

 v.

THOMAS CAREY, Warden

Respondent.

 /

No. C 01-03502 SI

ORDER RE: STATUS

On September 17, 2001, petitioner David Michael Graves filed a petition for writ of habeas

corpus, challenging his convictions for murder and attempted murder. On August 9, 2006, the Court

denied petitioner’s second amended petition, but granted his request to file a third amended petition

raising only the prosecutorial misconduct claim. On September 8, 2006, in response to letters from

petitioner and his former counsel, the Court granted petitioner an extension of time, to October 20, 2006,

to file his third amended petition. On September 11, 2006, petitioner filed a motion for an extension of

time, to October 19, 2006, in which to file the third amended petition, and in which to file a motion for

reconsideration concerning the claims that can be filed in the third amended petition. Petitioner

presumably sent this motion before receiving the Court’s September 8, 2006 Order granting petition an

extension of time. On October 11, 2006, the Court received a motion for leave to file and motion for

reconsideration. The Court construes petitioner’s motion as a motion for leave to request

reconsideration of both the dismissal of the second amended petition and the Court’s limitation of the

third amended petition to just one claim.

On February 1, 2007, petitioner filed a letter with the Court requesting to know the status of his

September 11, 2006 motion for extension of time, and his October 11, 2006 motion for reconsideration.

Case 3:01-cv-03502-SI Document 97 Filed 02/15/07 Page 1 of 2
United ForSta the Ntes orther Di n Distr striict oct Cf Califor ouniart

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

As discussed, the Court issued, on September 8, 2006, an order granting petitioner an extension of time,

to October 20, 2006, to file his third amended complaint. The Court will attach a copy of the September

8 order to this order. 

The Court has not yet ruled on petitioner’s motion for reconsideration. The Court has not done

so because an issue raised in petitioner’s second amended habeas petition is currently before the Ninth

Circuit in another case, King v. Lamarque, No. 05-15757. Once the issue in King is fully resolved, this

Court will consider petitioner’s motion for reconsideration. The Court therefore STAYS the deadline

for filing the third amended petition for 90 days, that is until May 16, 2007. If the King petition is

still pending in the Ninth Circuit at that point, either party may request this Court to extend the stay. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 15, 2007 

SUSAN ILLSTON

United States District Judge

Case 3:01-cv-03502-SI Document 97 Filed 02/15/07 Page 2 of 2