Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00541/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00541-10/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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JESSE COLLINS,

Petitioner,

v.

DERRAL ADAMS, Warden,

Respondent.

 /

CV F 05-00541 OWW DLB HC

ORDER DIRECTING PETITIONER TO

SUBMIT FURTHER BRIEFING IN

RESPONSE TO HIS OBJECTIONS TO

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

[Doc. 29]

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 

 On January 13, 2006, Respondent filed a motion to dismiss the petition, and Petitioner

filed an opposition on February 22, 2006. (Court Docs. 16, 19.) On April 10, 2006, the Court

granted Petitioner thirty days to submit further evidence in support of his claim for equitable

tolling based on his medical condition. (Court Doc. 24.) Petitioner did not respond to the

Court’s order. On June 28, 2006, the undersigned issued Findings and Recommendations

recommending that Respondent’s motion to dismiss be granted. (Court Doc. 26.) Petitioner

filed objections to the Findings and Recommendations on October 4, 2006. (Court Doc. 29.) In

his objections, Petitioner contends that he has “tried repeatedly to obtain documents from the

California Substance Abuse Treatment Facility Medical Department, and his requests has not

been excepted or adhered to.” (Court Doc. 29, at 1.) Petitioner contends that he has not been

able to obtain any documents because the medical department is not providing his the proper

Case 1:05-cv-00541-OWW -DLB Document 30 Filed 12/11/06 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

assistance. (Id.) Petitioner requests that the Court either decide the matter or direct the prison

staff to provide such requests to Petitioner. The Court finds that even if found merit to

Petitioner’s claim to order Respondent to provide further documentation to Petitioner, Petitioner

has not stated what he has done to obtain such documents, what the documents consist of, and

whose has possession of the documents. Without such information, the Court cannot determine

whether further briefing in this matter is necessary. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

1. Within fifteen (15) days from the date of service of this order, Petitioner shall

provide further briefing in support of his objections setting forth what efforts he

has engaged in to obtain said documents, describe what the documents consist of

and whose has possession of said documents; and

2. Failure to comply with this order will result in the Court submitting the Findings

and Recommendations to the District Judge for review. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: December 11, 2006 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

3b142a UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00541-OWW -DLB Document 30 Filed 12/11/06 Page 2 of 2