Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_03-cv-03703/USCOURTS-cand-3_03-cv-03703-0/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANTOINE CRECY,

Petitioner,

 vs.

D.L. RUNNELS,

Respondent.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 03-3703 JSW (PR)

ORDER GRANTING LEAVE TO

AMEND, DIRECTING RESPONDENT

TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL

RESPONSE AND INSTRUCTIONS TO

THE CLERK

(Docket No. 10)

Petitioner, a prisoner of the State of California confined at the High Desert State

Prison filed a pro se habeas corpus petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging the

constitutional validity of his state conviction. On September 26, 2003, this Court ordered

Respondent to show cause why the petition should not be granted. On October 29, 2003,

Respondent filed a response to the petition. On November 4, 2005, Petitioner filed an

amended petition containing an additional claim and a motion to amend the petition. 

Petitioner alleges that the claims raised therein have been fully exhausted in the state

courts. Liberally construed, it appears from the face of the petition that the additional

claims are cognizable in a federal habeas action. Accordingly, motion to amend the

petition is GRANTED (docket no. 10) and Respondent is ordered to respond to the

additional claims in the petition, identified therein as claim three, as set forth below.

The Clerk shall serve a copy of this order and the amended petition, docket number

10, and all attachments thereto, on Respondent. The Clerk also shall serve a copy of this

order on Petitioner . 

Case 3:03-cv-03703-JSW Document 11 Filed 04/05/06 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

Respondent shall file with the Court and serve on Petitioner, within thirty (30)

days of the issuance of this order, a supplemental answer conforming in all respects to

Rule 5 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, showing cause why a writ of habeas

corpus should not be granted as to Petitioner’s claim three. If Petitioner wishes to respond

to the answer, he shall do so by filing a traverse with the Court and serving it on

Respondent within fifteen (15) days of his receipt of the answer.

Respondent may file a motion to dismiss on procedural grounds in lieu of an

answer, as set forth in the Advisory Committee Notes to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing

Section 2254 Cases. If Respondent files such a motion, Petitioner shall file with the Court

and serve on Respondent an opposition or statement of non-opposition within thirty (30)

days of receipt of the motion, and Respondent shall file with the Court and serve on

Petitioner a reply within fifteen (15) days of receipt of any opposition.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: April 5, 2006 

 JEFFREY S. WHITE

United States District Judge

Case 3:03-cv-03703-JSW Document 11 Filed 04/05/06 Page 2 of 2