Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_00-cv-03706/USCOURTS-cand-3_00-cv-03706-21/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 535
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus - Death Penalty
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

MICHAEL M. CRAIN

State Bar No. 45083

P. O. Box 3730

Santa Monica, California 90408

Telephone 310-571-3324

Fax 310-494-0750

E-mail: Michaelmcrain@aol.com

 

ROBERT D. BACON

 State Bar No. 73297

484 Lake Park Avenue, PMB 110

Oakland, California 94610

Telephone 510-834-6219

Fax 510-444-6861

E-mail: bacon2254@aol.com

Attorneys for Petitioner Carpenter

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO

)

DAVID J. CARPENTER, )

)

Petitioner, )

 )

vs. )

 )

KEVIN CHAPPELL, Warden )

of San Quentin State Prison, )

 )

Respondent. )

___________________________________ )

No. 3:00-cv-03706-MMC

DEATH PENALTY CASE

STIPULATION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE

RELIEF and PROPOSED ORDER

[To Exceed Page Limitation]

[Civil L.R. 7-11]

Counsel for Petitioner and Respondent hereby stipulate that Petitioner may file an opposition

of up to 35 pages to Respondent’s pending Motion for Reconsideration (Doc. 169). The opposition is

due August 11, 2014, and counsel anticipate that it will be filed on that date.

The Court authorized 35 pages for Petitioner’s opposition to the very similar motion in Mr.

Carpenter’s other habeas case, No. 3:98-cv-02444-MMC.

As in No. 98-2444, Petitioner’s counsel will require additional pages for two reasons: First, to

address aspects of the procedural default doctrine that are independent of, and not addressed by, Walker

v. Martin, 131 S.Ct. 1120 (2011). Second, to address the issues of procedural default on a claim-byStipulation for Admin Relief No. 3:00-cv-03706-MMC 1

Case 3:00-cv-03706-MMC Document 171 Filed 06/13/14 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

claim basis. Many of the claims respondent seeks to dismiss include allegations presented to the

California Supreme Court in the second state habeas petition and also allegations presented to the

California Supreme Court on earlier occasions. Petitioner’s counsel intends to argue that principles of

procedural default, if they apply at all, may apply to a portion of a claim in the federal petition without

applying to the entirety of the claim. Petitioner’s counsel intends to address each claim separately in

this manner.

Should respondent require a reasonable number of additional pages for his reply after reviewing

petitioner’s opposition, petitioner’s counsel will not object at that time.

Respectfully submitted June 13, 2014.

/s/ Michael M. Crain

MICHAEL M. CRAIN

/s/ Robert D. Bacon

ROBERT D. BACON

Attorneys for Petitioner David J. Carpenter 

/s/ Stephanie C. Brenan

STEPHANIE C. BRENAN

Deputy Attorney General

[consent to sign obtained June 9, 2014]

/s/ James William Bilderback II

JAMES WILLIAM BILDERBACK II

Supervising Deputy Attorney General

[consent to sign obtained June 13, 2014]

Attorneys for Respondent

O R D E R

Good cause appearing, and pursuant to stipulation, IT IS SO ORDERED. Petitioner may file

an opposition of up to 35 pages to the pending Motion for Reconsideration.

June ___, 2014 ____________________________________________

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Stipulation for Admin Relief No. 3:00-cv-03706-MMC 2

Case 3:00-cv-03706-MMC Document 171 Filed 06/13/14 Page 2 of 2