Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-00223/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-00223-24/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 535
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus - Death Penalty
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Ptn for Writ of H/C - Stay of Execution

---

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOSEPH MARTIN DANKS, 

 Petitioner,

 v.

CHANCE ANDES, Warden of San Quentin 

Rehabilitation Center, 

 Respondent.

1

Case No. 1:11-cv-00223-JLT

DEATH PENALTY CASE

ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER’S 

UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR SECOND 

EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE BRIEF IN 

SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF 

HABEAS CORPUS

(Doc. 111)

Petitioner Joseph Martin Danks, through counsel the Habeas Corpus Resource Center 

by lead attorney Gary Sowards, moves to extend the deadline for filing his brief in support of 

the 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for writ of habeas corpus from December 17, 2024 to April 16, 

2025. This extension of time, Petitioner’s second such request, is necessary because ongoing 

responsibilities in military commission proceedings at the United States Naval Station 

Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and the press of scheduled proceedings in an unrelated state capital 

case have left lead counsel unable to perform the work reasonably necessary to prepare and file

a professionally adequate merits brief by the current due date. (Doc. 111 at 3-6.)

2

 

1 Chance Andes, Acting Warden of San Quentin Rehabilitation Center since January 2024, is substituted as 

Respondent in place of his predecessor wardens. Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(d). 

2 Reference to pagination is to CM/ECF System pagination.

Case 1:11-cv-00223-JLT Document 112 Filed 12/03/24 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

Counsel for Petitioner represents that Respondent Warden Chance Anders, through 

counsel Deputy Attorney General Justain Riley, does not oppose the requested relief. (Id. at 5.) 

The Court, finding the matter amenable to resolution on the papers, GRANTS the 

requested relief and modifies the case schedule, for good cause shown. The Court is satisfied 

that notwithstanding Petitioner’s reasonable diligence and that of his lead counsel, the current 

scheduling deadline cannot be met. Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4) (“A schedule may be modified 

only for good cause and with the judge's consent.”); City of Lincoln v. Cnty. of Placer, 2023 

WL 2776091, at *6 (E.D. Cal. Apr. 4, 2023) (the “good cause” requirement focuses primarily 

on the party's diligence and its reasons for not acting sooner). 

THEREFORE, the Court rules that: 

1. Petitioner shall file his brief in support of the § 2254 petition for writ of habeas 

corpus NO LATER THAN APRIL 16, 2025. 

2. The current case schedule (Doc. 103) OTHERWISE SHALL REMAIN in full 

force and effect. 

3. The Court will NOT entertain a request for summary judgment. 

4. Motions for discovery, expansion of the record, and/or evidentiary hearing will 

be entertained only AFTER the Court’s §2254(d) analysis of the federal claims.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 3, 2024 

Case 1:11-cv-00223-JLT Document 112 Filed 12/03/24 Page 2 of 2