Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_06-cv-02531/USCOURTS-casd-3_06-cv-02531-4/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)

---

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

- 1 - 06CV2531

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BEN ALAN SNIPES,

Petitioner,

CASE NO. 06CV2531-LAB (AJB)

ORDER RE: PETITIONER’S

RESPONSE TO ORDER TO

SHOW CAUSE; AND

ORDER ACCEPTING AMENDED

PETITION FOR FILING

vs.

JAMES E. TILTON, Secretary of the

California Department of Corrections and

Rehabilitation,

Respondent.

On October 15, 2007, the Court issued an order dismissing Petitioner’s petition with

leave to amend. This order permitted Petitioner to file his amended petition no later than

October 29, 2007, which the Court later extended to November 26, 2007. On December 20,

after Petitioner had failed to file an amended petition, the Court ordered him to show cause

why this action should not be dismissed. Petitioner then submitted his response together

with an amended petition.

In his response to the Court’s order to show cause, Petitioner explains that he mailed

his amended petition on November 7, 2007, but that it apparently never arrived and he did

not realize this until the Court’s order to show cause pointed it out. In a notice entered

November 21, 2007 (Docket no. 28), Petitioner stated he had mailed the amended petition

Case 3:06-cv-02531-LAB-AJB Document 38 Filed 01/25/08 Page 1 of 2
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 - 06CV2531

but believed it may have been destroyed by hostile prison officials. It appears, however,

Petitioner actually believed his amended petition had eventually made its way to the Court,

because around December 6, 2007, he sought leave to supplement exhibits to the amended

petition. Because no amended petition was on file, the request to supplement exhibits was

rejected by discrepancy order (Docket no. 31). In his notice entered November 21, 2007,

Petitioner said he would be filing another copy, although he did not submit one until on or

around January 14, 2008. In a separate notice also entered November 21, 2007, Petitioner

gave notice he had been transferred to a different facility.

Although Petitioner’s statements regarding whether he believed his amended petition

had been received by the Court and filed are somewhat contradictory, the Court accepts his

representation that he attempted to mail it in a timely fashion. The Court’s order to show

cause, issued December 20, 2007, is discharged. The amended petition Petitioner

submitted on or around January 14, 2008 is accepted for filing. The Clerk shall file the

submitted amended petition (Docket no. 37, attachments 2–3) as a separate docket item,

noting in the docket it is filed nunc pro tunc to January 14, 2008.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: January 24, 2008

HONORABLE LARRY ALAN BURNS

United States District Judge

Case 3:06-cv-02531-LAB-AJB Document 38 Filed 01/25/08 Page 2 of 2