Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_94-cv-01665/USCOURTS-caed-2_94-cv-01665-15/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

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANTONIO ESPINOZA,

Petitioner,

v.

WARDEN, SAN QUENTIN STATE 

PRISON,

Respondent.

No. 2:94-cv-1665 JAM DB

DEATH PENALTY CASE

ORDER

Petitioner is a condemned state prisoner proceeding with a petition for a writ of habeas 

corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. After new counsel was appointed for petitioner in February 

2016, the court ordered petitioner’s counsel to file a statement describing the status of these 

proceedings and a plan for going forward. (ECF No. 266.) On October 27, 2016, petitioner filed 

that statement. (ECF No. 268.) On December 12, 2016, respondent filed a responsive statement. 

(ECF No. 270.) 

In his October 27 statement, petitioner requests the opportunity to file a reply to 

respondent’s statement. The court finds good cause for the filing of a reply to address 

respondent’s statement and, if petitioner wishes, to address briefly the effect, if any, of the 

passage of Proposition 66 on these proceedings.

////

Case 2:94-cv-01665-KJM-SCR Document 271 Filed 12/20/16 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

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that within thirty days of the filed date of this 

order, petitioner shall file any reply to respondent’s December 12, 2016 statement. If respondent 

wishes to respond, he may file a sur-reply within twenty days after service of petitioner’s reply. 

Dated: December 19, 2016

DLB:9

DLB1/orders.capital/Espinoza.sts reply

Case 2:94-cv-01665-KJM-SCR Document 271 Filed 12/20/16 Page 2 of 2