Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00922/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00922-13/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

MICHAEL COREY SLAUGHTER,

Petitioner,

v.

KEVIN CHAPPELL, Warden of San Quentin 

State Prison,

Respondent.

Case No. 1:05-cv-00922-AWI-SAB

DEATH PENALTY CASE

ORDER FOLLOWING CASE 

MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE 

This matter came on for a telephonic case management conference on May 26, 2015, at 

1:30 p.m., in the above-entitled Court, the Honorable Stanley A. Boone presiding. Counsel 

Jennifer Mann appeared for Petitioner and counsel Ryan McCarroll appeared for Respondent. 

The purpose of the conference was to discuss further scheduling. 

Following review of the parties’ joint statement (ECF No. 106), and discussions with 

counsel, the Court determined that the best course of action in this matter is to schedule merits 

briefing including requests for factual development, provided the Court will address merits prior 

to procedural defenses and retroactivity under Teague v. Lane, 489 U.S. 288 (1989). 

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that: 

1. On or before October 3, 2016, Petitioner shall file a memorandum of 

points and authorities which substantively addresses full scope merits 

Case 1:05-cv-00922-KES Document 109 Filed 05/27/15 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

briefing under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 in support of each claim in the second 

amended petition, including applicable 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d) standard(s) 

and the impact of the Supreme Court’s decision in Cullen v. Pinholster, 

131 S. Ct. 1388 (2011). 

2. On or before April 3, 2017, Respondent shall file a memorandum of points 

and authorities in opposition. As discussed during the May 26 conference, 

that opposition shall include Respondent’s assertion that some claims are 

barred by the procedural default doctrine and/or retroactivity under 

Teague.

3. On or before October 2, 2017, Petitioner shall file any reply memorandum 

of points and authorities. 

4. On or before January 16, 2018, Petitioner shall file any motion for 

discovery, expansion of the record, and/or evidentiary hearing. 

5. On or before March 19, 2018, Respondent shall file any opposition to 

Petitioner’s motion for discovery, expansion of the record and/or 

evidentiary hearing. 

6. On or before May 4, 2018, Petitioner shall file any reply to Respondent’s 

opposition. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 27, 2015 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00922-KES Document 109 Filed 05/27/15 Page 2 of 2