Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_91-cv-00616/USCOURTS-caed-1_91-cv-00616-4/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DOUGLAS RAY STANKEWITZ, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. )

)

ROBERT L. AYERS, Jr., Warden )

of San Quentin State Prison, )

)

Respondent. )

)

Case No. 1:91-cv-00616-AWI

DEATH PENALTY CASE

Order Reinstating Respondent’s

Motion to Expand the Record

(Doc. # 543), Setting Briefing

Schedule and Hearing

DATE: March 24, 2008

TIME: 3:00 p.m.

On January 24, 2008, a Case Management Conference was held in the

case of Petitioner Douglas Ray Stankewitz (“Stankewitz”) to discuss the

anticipated litigation of the remanded claim following appointment of new

counsel to represent Stankewitz. Appearances were made telephonically

by Harry W. Simon, of the Capital Habeas Unit of the Federal Defenders’

Office of the Eastern District of California, counsel for Stankewitz, and

Deputy Attorney General John McLean, counsel for Respondent Robert L.

Ayers, Jr. (“the Warden”).

The Warden filed a motion for discovery January 26, 2005, seeking

counsel’s files from Stankewitz’s first trial in 1978. Stankewitz asserted the

files contained confidential communications protected by the attorneyCase 1:91-cv-00616-AWI Document 551 Filed 01/30/08 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

OCMCStnk 2

client privilege, which was not waived by the assertion of ineffective

assistance of counsel at his second trial. The documents were lodged for in

camera review on May 20, 2005. Certain documents were found to contain

confidential communications between Stankewitz and his counsel, and

were denied discovery, while the remaining non-confidential portions

were granted discovery on October 23, 2006. Following inspection of the

discovery documents, the Warden filed a motion to expand the record with

those documents on November 21, 2006. The motion was denied without

prejudice on December 4, 2006, due to the concurrent withdrawal of

Stankewitz’s counsel.

Counsel for the parties agreed to proceed with the prior motion to

expand the record, so that motion (Document #543) is hereby reinstated

without the necessity of re-filing. The Warden’s response to the January

25, 2005 Order to Show Cause will remain deferred until resolution of the

Warden’s motion.

Stankewitz’s opposition to the Warden’s Motion to Expand the

Record is due by April 23, 2008, at 4 p.m. The Warden’s reply to the 

opposition is due by May 23, 2008, at 4 p.m. A hearing on the motion will

be held Monday, June 16, 2008, at 1:30 p.m., in Courtroom No. 2.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 29, 2008 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

b64h1h UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:91-cv-00616-AWI Document 551 Filed 01/30/08 Page 2 of 2