Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_96-cv-06252/USCOURTS-caed-1_96-cv-06252-0/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 * Steven W. Ornoski is substituted for his predecessor, Jeanne S.

Woodford, as Acting Warden of San Quentin State Prison pursuant to

96dp6252.O2ApptCounsel.Ray.wpd Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(d).

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CLARENCE RAY, JR., )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. )

)

Steven W. Ornoski, as Acting )

Warden of San Quentin State )

Prison,* )

)

Respondent. )

)

Case No. CIV. F-96-6252-AWI

DEATH PENALTY CASE

ORDER GRANTING REQUEST TO

APPOINT COUNSEL; DIRECTING

PETITIONER TO FILE QUARTERLY

STATUS REPORTS REGARDING

STATUS OF STATE PROCEEDINGS;

AND DIRECTING PETITIONER TO

SCHEDULE A CASE MANAGEMENT

CONFERENCE 

This matter is before the Court on the application of Petitioner

Clarence Ray, Jr. (“Ray”) to refer his case to the Selection Board of

the Eastern District of California for appointment of federal counsel.

The Court previously, on February 13, 1997, denied Ray’s request for

appointment of counsel without prejudice due to the pendency of a

state petition for post-conviction relief, since under thencontrolling precedent and policy, federal habeas litigants were not

permitted to work on federal habeas cases while state exhaustion

proceedings were pending. As Ray points out in his moving papers, the

Supreme Court decision in Rhines v. Weber, 544 U.S. ___, 125 S.Ct.

1528 (2005) has altered precedent in this regard. Under Rhines,

federal habeas litigants are now permitted to proceed with some

Case 1:96-cv-06252-LJO-SAB Document 14 Filed 12/30/05 Page 1 of 4
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

96dp6252.O2ApptCounsel.Ray.wpd 2

aspects of litigation of federal habeas petitions though state

exhaustion proceedings have not been completed.

The Court finds good cause for granting Ray’s request. Due to

the procedural status of the case, however, the Court also finds it

necessary to require Ray to file quarterly status reports concerning

the progress of state proceedings and to schedule a case management

conference to discuss matters that may be of interest to Respondent

Steven W. Ornoski, As Acting Warden of San Quentin State Prison (the

“Warden”) and his counsel. As a backdrop for the anticipated case

management conference, the chronology of Ray’s post-conviction efforts

in federal and state court is detailed:

• November 8, 1996, Ray commenced this action in the Sacramento

Division of the Court seeking a temporary stay of execution and

appointment of counsel.

• November 14, 1996, Ray filed a petition for state habeas relief

in the California Supreme Court.

• November 25, 1996, after the case was transferred to the Fresno

Division of the Court, Ray added a request for leave to proceed

in forma pauperis; all requests were granted.

• December 18, 1996, the Court entered an order modifying the

duration of the stay of execution to and including February 7,

1997, while the Selection Board recommended counsel for

appointment.

• February 13, 1997, in response to a request to extend the

temporary stay of execution another 45 days during the process

of recommending counsel, the Court denied without prejudice the

request for stay and foreclosed further efforts to appoint

counsel on account of the pending state exhaustion petition.

Case 1:96-cv-06252-LJO-SAB Document 14 Filed 12/30/05 Page 2 of 4
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

96dp6252.O2ApptCounsel.Ray.wpd 3

• September 27, 2002, Ray filed a second state habeas petition,

alleging a single claim under Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 307

(2002).

• April 9, 2003, the California Supreme Court denied Ray’s initial

state habeas petition (filed November 14, 1996).

The Court grants Ray’s request for appointment of counsel, and

to that end, refers the case to the Selection Board for the Eastern

District of California. The Court requests that the Selection Board

keep the Court apprised, through informal communications on a monthly

basis, of the Board’s efforts in finding suitable counsel.

Because the Court learned for the first time when reviewing the

present application that Ray’s initial state habeas petition was

denied over two and one-half years ago, with no notification to this

Court, and further that a second state habeas petition was filed over

three years ago, again with no notification to this Court, the Court

requires Ray to file with the Court quarterly status reports

describing the progress of state court proceedings. These quarterly

status reports shall be filed at the beginning the first, fourth,

seventh, and tenth months of each calendar year, beginning with

January 2006.

To provide the Warden an opportunity to address the present

order, the status of the state habeas petition, Ray’s plans for filing

his initial federal petition, or any other matter, the Court will

conduct a preliminary case management conference. To accomplish this,

Ray, though the Office of the Federal Defender and the Selection Board

for the Eastern District of California will schedule a case management

conference with the Court at the earliest date available on the

Case 1:96-cv-06252-LJO-SAB Document 14 Filed 12/30/05 Page 3 of 4
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

96dp6252.O2ApptCounsel.Ray.wpd 4

Court’s calendar at which a representative from the Federal Defender’s

Office and the Attorney General’s Office are able to attend. The

conference shall be conducted telephonically, with the Federal

Defender responsible for arranging and initiating the call. The

Federal Defender shall provide written notice of the hearing by filing

a Notice of CMC.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: December 30, 2005 

 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

 Anthony W. Ishii

 United States District Judge

Case 1:96-cv-06252-LJO-SAB Document 14 Filed 12/30/05 Page 4 of 4