Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_98-cv-00784/USCOURTS-caed-2_98-cv-00784-4/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

1

 Both the October 19 order and the November 15 findings and recommendations were

issued by a different magistrate judge.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GARY DALE HINES,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-98-0784 GEB EFB DP

vs.

EDDIE YLST, Acting Warden, ORDER

Respondent. DEATH PENALTY CASE

 /

Petitioner is a prisoner with counsel seeking a writ of habeas corpus. See 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2254. On November 13, 2006, the district judge reversed the October 19, 2004, order denying

petitioner’s requests to expand the record and deemed withdrawn the November 15, 2005,

findings and recommendations, which recommended summary judgment be entered against

petitioner on all his penalty phase claims.1

 On May 22, 2007, the parties agreed that a status

conference would be beneficial. The parties shall be prepared to discuss the following:

1. The procedural history and present posture of this case;

2. Whether the record should be expanded and, if so, the time necessary for doing so;

3. Whether petitioner anticipates filing a motion for an evidentiary hearing on any

penalty phase claims; 

Case 2:98-cv-00784-TLN-JDP Document 313 Filed 06/08/07 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

2

4. Counsel for petitioner shall be prepared to discuss outstanding budgeting matters.

Accordingly, is hereby is ORDERED that:

1. The parties, through counsel, shall appear for a status conference before the

undersigned on June 20, 2007, at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom No. 25.

2. The parties shall submit separate status reports no later than seven court days before

the status conference;

3. Following the proceedings in open court, the court will conduct an ex parte discussion

with petitioner’s counsel about budgeting matters only.

Dated: June 7, 2007.

Case 2:98-cv-00784-TLN-JDP Document 313 Filed 06/08/07 Page 2 of 2