Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_91-cv-01079/USCOURTS-caed-2_91-cv-01079-1/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

STEVEN H. CASWELL,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-91-1079 FCD EFB P

vs.

ARTHUR CALDERON,

Respondent. ORDER

 /

A status conference was held in this matter on January 20, 2010, at 10:00 a.m.. Eric S.

Multhaup appeared for petitioner. Pamela B. Hooley appeared for respondent. Upon hearing the

arguments of counsel and good cause appearing therefor, THE COURT MADE THE

FOLLOWING ORDERS and announced them to the parties in open court:

1. On or before March 17, 2010, the parties shall file all of the documents identified at

the status conference as potentially necessary to an adjudication of the due process claim

contained in the instant habeas petition, together with an index of those documents. The

documents should include the following:

A. The transcript of petitioner’s 1976 trial, consisting of one volume of the

Clerk’s Transcript on Appeal and three volumes of the Reporter’s Transcript on Appeal;

////

Case 2:91-cv-01079-GEB-EFB Document 165 Filed 01/21/10 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

1

 Items D, E, and F are currently contained in the court record. However, for ease of

reference, these documents should be resubmitted to the court as part of the package of

documents described above. 

2

B. The transcripts of petitioner’s 1982, 1984, 1985, 1986 and 1999 parole

suitability hearings before the Board of Parole Hearings;

C. The “lifer packages” submitted to the Board of Parole Hearings for use during

petitioner’s 1982, 1984, 1985, 1986 and 1999 parole suitability hearings;

D. The December 21, 2000 written opinion of the Solano County Superior Court

granting petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus (Exhibit to document #101); 

E. The published opinion of the California Court of Appeal (In re Caswell, 92

Cal.App.4th 1017 (2001)); 

F. The unpublished opinion of the California Court of Appeal upholding

petitioner’s judgment of conviction (Exhibit A to petitioner’s September 16, 1991 application for

a writ of habeas corpus, and Appendix A to respondent’s answer filed March 9, 1992)); 

G. Respondent’s Answer filed October 25, 2004, and all exhibits thereto; and

H. Any other documents the parties believe are necessary to the court’s

consideration of the instant habeas petition.1

 

Items B - H and the index shall be filed electronically and in hard copy. Item A shall be

filed in hard copy.

2. Simultaneous with the filing of the documents and index described above, the parties

may file objections, if any, to the court’s consideration of any of the documents in connection

with its decision on the due process claim contained in the instant habeas petition. 

DATED: January 21, 2010.

Case 2:91-cv-01079-GEB-EFB Document 165 Filed 01/21/10 Page 2 of 2