Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_94-cv-01665/USCOURTS-caed-2_94-cv-01665-28/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

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANTONIO ESPINOZA,

Petitioner,

v.

WARDEN,

Respondent.

No. 2:94-cv-1665 KJM DB P

ORDER

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding through counsel with a petition for a writ of 

habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. §2254. Pending before the court is petitioner’s counsel’s motion 

to have petitioner declared incompetent and for the appointment of a guardian ad litem. (ECF 

No. 309.) This court previously determined that the first step in considering counsel’s motion is a

hearing to provide petitioner notice of the motion. (See ECF No. 320.) 

On December 4, 2023, the undersigned held that notice hearing at the California Medical 

Facility where petitioner is currently incarcerated. Petitioner and his counsel, Lissa Gardner, 

appeared.1 The undersigned informed petitioner of his counsel’s motion, questioned him about 

his understanding of the motion, and answered petitioner’s questions. 

////

1 Respondent informed the court previously that they take no position on petitioner’s counsel’s 

motion and respondent’s counsel did not participate in the hearing. 

Case 2:94-cv-01665-KJM-SCR Document 329 Filed 12/05/23 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

This court finds the appropriate next step in considering counsel’s motion is the 

appointment of a neutral mental health expert to evaluate petitioner’s present competence under 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 17. To that end, counsel for the parties shall meet and confer to 

attempt to identify an appropriate neutral mental health expert to propose to the court. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that on or before December 29, 2023, the 

parties shall file a joint statement in which they either propose a neutral mental health expert to 

evaluate petitioner’s competence for purposes of his counsel’s motion or describe their 

differences in failing to agree on such an expert. 

Dated: December 4, 2023

DB:9

DB prisoner inbox/capital/Espinoza.propose expert

Case 2:94-cv-01665-KJM-SCR Document 329 Filed 12/05/23 Page 2 of 2