Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-00143/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-00143-10/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

 At the conclusion of the status conference, counsel for respondent was excused and the 1

court conducted an ex parte budgeting conference with counsel for petitioner.

1

`

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RAYMOND EDWARD STEELE, 

Petitioner, No. CIV S-03-0143 GEB KJM

vs. DEATH PENALTY CASE

JOHN STOKES,

 Acting Warden of California State

 Prison at San Quentin, 

Respondent. ORDER

 /

On October 24, 2007 the undersigned held a status conference. Peter Giannini 1

participated telephonically for petitioner. Eric Christoffersen appeared for respondent. In

addition, Joe Schlesinger of the Office of the Federal Defender was present to inform the court of

progress on obtaining co-counsel for Mr. Giannini. In the Answer, respondent raises the

procedural defenses of exhaustion, procedural default, and non-retroactivity under Teague v.

Lane, 489 U.S. 288 (1989). The court has already ruled on the exhaustion issues. Respondent

informed the court that he raised them to preserve them for appeal. Before addressing discovery

and other evidentiary hearing issues, the court will consider the procedural defenses. 

Case 2:03-cv-00143-GEB-CKD Document 107 Filed 10/25/07 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

 The court recognizes that some Teague issues may be difficult to address until the 2

claims are more fully developed. If respondent finds that is the case, he may preserve the Teague

argument with respect to some claims for a later time.

2

Accordingly, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:

1. Within sixty days of the filed date of this order, respondent shall file a

memorandum of points and authorities on his assertions that some of petitioner’s

claims are barred under the procedural default doctrine and under Teague ; and 2

2. Within sixty days of the filing of respondent’s brief, petitioner shall file an

opposing memorandum. 

3. Within thirty days thereafter, respondent may file a reply. Thereafter, the

undersigned will set oral argument if necessary.

DATED: October 24, 2007.

steelests.or

Case 2:03-cv-00143-GEB-CKD Document 107 Filed 10/25/07 Page 2 of 2