Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_04-cv-02233/USCOURTS-cand-4_04-cv-02233-4/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)

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SALVADOR A. RODRIGUEZ,

Petitioner, No. C 04-2233 PJH

v. ORDER SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE

RE: REQUEST FOR EVIDENTIARY 

HEARING; REQUIRING SUBMISSION OF

SUPPLEMENTAL DOCUMENTS

DERRAL ADAMS, Warden,

Respondent.

_______________________________/

On March 1, 2007, this court appointed counsel for petitioner Salvador Rodriguez

(“Rodriguez”), and on March 14, 2007, current counsel, Linda Fullerton, was appointed. 

Subsequently, on April 26, 2007, because the court determined that the pro se briefing on

the only issue was inadequate, this court afforded Fullerton, on Rodriguez’s behalf, the

opportunity to file a supplemental traverse and also to request an evidentiary hearing. After

numerous continuances, Rodriguez filed his supplemental traverse and request for

evidentiary hearing on September 17, 2007.

Rodriguez attempts to expand the issue before this court in the supplemental

traverse beyond the scope of that in his petition and in this court’s numerous orders to

date. In his sole surviving claim, Rodriguez had contended that he received ineffective

assistance of counsel based on his trial counsel’s failure to assign an investigator to

investigate the facts of his case, a claim which has been detailed in letters in the file from a

former investigator, William Walter Foskett. However, in his supplemental traverse,

Rodriguez now additionally argues that trial counsel’s failure to present evidence at trial

(witnesses that had indeed been interviewed) also constituted ineffective assistance of

Case 4:04-cv-02233-PJH Document 47 Filed 09/27/07 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

counsel. 

In attempting to determine whether the issue, as framed by Rodriguez in his

supplemental traverse, was raised before the state appellate courts in Rodriguez’s state

habeas petition, the court became aware that respondent failed to include the actual order

from the California Court of Appeal with the lodged exhibits. Instead, respondent included

only a copy of the appellate court’s docket reflecting that an order had been issued. See

Exh. 9. It is necessary for this court’s record to include the appellate court’s February 13,

2003 order itself. It is also necessary for this court to review Rodriguez’s February 7, 2003

state habeas petition to ascertain whether he exhausted the claim as currently presented in

his supplemental traverse.

Accordingly, respondent is ORDERED to file and serve a response to Rodriguez’s

request for an evidentiary hearing no later than fourteen days from the date of this order. 

In addition to the response, respondent is ORDERED to submit copies of the California

Court of Appeal’s February 13, 2003 order denying Rodriguez’s habeas petition, and his

February 7, 2003 habeas petition.

Rodriguez may file and serve a reply with respect to his request for an evidentiary

hearing no later than twenty-one days from the date of this order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 27, 2007

______________________________

PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON

United States District Judge

Case 4:04-cv-02233-PJH Document 47 Filed 09/27/07 Page 2 of 2