Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-02606/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-02606-3/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)

---

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 States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PAUL WAYNE KING,

Petitioner,

 v.

BOB HOREL,

Respondent /

No. C 06-2606 MMC (PR)

ORDER SETTING BRIEFING

SCHEDULE

By order filed April 26, 2006, the Court directed respondent to file a motion to

dismiss or answer in response to the above-titled petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The

Court’s order provided that, in the event respondent filed an answer, the Court would “issue

a further briefing schedule, directing the parties to address the merits of the claims set forth

in the petition, and, specifically, to address whether petitioner is entitled to relief under 28

U.S.C. § 2254(d).” (See Order of Service; Directing Respondent to File Response to

Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus at 4:1-4.) On July 20, 2006, respondent filed an answer

to the petition.

Accordingly, the Court hereby sets the following briefing schedule:

1. No later than August 25, 2006, petitioner shall file a memorandum of points and

authorities in support of his petition, not to exceed 25 pages, setting forth, as to each claim

asserted, why the state court’s adjudication of the claim either “(1) resulted in a decision

Case 3:06-cv-02606-MMC Document 15 Filed 07/26/06 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

that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal

law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States; or (2) resulted in a decision

that was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence

presented in the State court proceeding.” See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d).

2. No later than September 15, 2006, respondent shall file a memorandum of points

and authorities in opposition to the petition, not to exceed 25 pages.

3. No later than September 29, 2006, respondent may file a memorandum of points

and authorities in reply to respondent’s opposition, not to exceed 15 pages.

4. As of September 29, 2006, the matter will stand submitted.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 26, 2006 

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:06-cv-02606-MMC Document 15 Filed 07/26/06 Page 2 of 2