Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_02-cv-00127/USCOURTS-cand-5_02-cv-00127-0/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

Order Directing Respondent to File Suppl Answer

P:\PRO-SE\SJ.JW\HC.02\Pillars127.suppl-answer.wpd 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WILLIAM S. PILLARS,

Petitioner,

 vs.

A.A. LAMARQUE, 

Respondent.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 02-00127 JW (PR)

ORDER DIRECTING

RESPONDENT TO FILE

SUPPLEMENTAL ANSWER

Petitioner, a state prisoner, filed a pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The Court dismissed the petition with leave to amend. 

On July 12, 2002, petitioner filed an amended petition. The Court found the amended

petition, liberally construed, stated the following cognizable claims: (1) the prosecutor

systematically excluded African-Americans from the jury pool; (2) the trial court

improperly excluded evidence that petitioner had been falsely accused; and (3) the trial

court erred in refusing to dismiss a juror for misconduct and intentional concealment

during voir dire. Respondent was ordered to show cause why the amended petition

should not be granted. Respondent filed an answer, but failed to address the merits of

the third claim. 

Respondent is given thirty (30) days from the date of this order to file a

Case 5:02-cv-00127-JW Document 25 Filed 10/19/07 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

27

28

Order Directing Respondent to File Suppl Answer

P:\PRO-SE\SJ.JW\HC.02\Pillars127.suppl-answer.wpd 2

supplemental answer addressing the merits of claim three, showing cause why a writ of

habeas corpus should not be issued. Respondent may raise any procedural defects but

must address the claim on the merits. Respondent shall file with the answer a copy of

all portions of the state trial record that have been transcribed previously and that are

relevant to a determination of the issue and/or all other pertinent exhibits, but only

such documents that were not previously filed with respondent’s original answer. 

Petitioner may file a traverse to the supplemental answer within twenty (20)

days the answer is served upon him. Petitioner must serve his response on respondent. 

Respondent may file a reply to an opposition within fifteen (15) days of the date the

opposition is served. 

DATED: JAMES WARE

 United States District Judge

October 17, 2007

Case 5:02-cv-00127-JW Document 25 Filed 10/19/07 Page 2 of 2