Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-00223/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-00223-3/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOSEPH MARTIN DANKS,

Petitioner,

vs.

MICHAEL MARTEL, as Acting Warden of San

Quentin State Prison,*

Respondent.

_______________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 1:11-cv-00223 LJO

DEATH PENALTY CASE

ORDER FOLLOWING PHASE I CASE

MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND

CLARIFYING APPOINTMENT OF

COUNSEL

DATE: March 17, 2011

TIME: 8:30 a.m.

COURTROOM FOUR

This matter came on for a Phase I Case Management Conference (“CMC”) on March 17, 2011

at 8:30 a.m. in the above entitled Court, the Honorable Lawrence J. O’Neill, presiding. Petitioner Joseph

Martin Danks (“Danks”) was represented by three staff attorneys from his appointed counsel of record,

the California Habeas Corpus Resource Center (“HCRC”), namely, Gary D. Sowards, Margo Hunter,

and Kevin Bringuel. Respondent Michael Martel, as Acting Warden of San Quentin State Prison, (the

“Warden”) was represented by Deputy Attorney General Leanne LeMon. All counsel appeared

telephonically.

The February 17, 2011 order appointing counsel and initiating case management procedures

appointed the HCRC as Danks’ counsel of record with the understanding that Mr. Sowards and Ms.

Hunter would be staffing the case. Since the appointment order was filed, the Court has learned that

HCRC staff attorney Kevin Bringuel also has been and will continue to work on the case. As has

occurred in other cases involving the HCRC, staffing of cases may change, but the appointment of the

Michael Martel, as Acting Warden of San Quentin State Prison, is substituted as the Respondent in this case pursuant to

11dp223.OFollPhaseICMC.Dnk.wpd 1 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(d).

Case 1:11-cv-00223-JLT Document 14 Filed 03/18/11 Page 1 of 3
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

HCRC remains the same. Accordingly the appointment order in this case need not be amended,

augmented, or supplemented. 

In initiating case management procedures, the February 17, 2011 order directed counsel for both

parties to familiarize themselves with the Fresno Attorney Guide and Eastern District Local Rule 191. 

At the CMC they were to be prepared to discuss the statute of limitations, the date for the Warden to

lodge the state record, and the time necessary for Danks to assemble the record. That order also directed

counsel for both parties to complete confidential case evaluation forms and counsel for Danks to file

under seal a Phase I budget and case management plan. 

There is no dispute regarding the statute of limitations. The parties agree the limitations period

expires September 15, 2011. Next, the Warden represents that the state record can be lodged and an

index filed by May 10, 2011. This schedule is acceptable to the HCRC attorneys. The discussion about

assembly of the record by the HCRC attorneys included an estimate for the completion of preliminary

investigation. The estimate given was June 1, 2011. During the confidential portion of the hearing,

however, it became clear that the HCRC attorneys need more time to submit a budget plan for

investigation to substantiate Danks’ claims. Accordingly, Phase I will be shortened so that more

comprehensive plan can be submitted for Phase II. Phase I will terminate on April 30, 2011 and Phase

II will commence on May 1, 2011. 

With the agreement of Ms. LeMon on behalf of the Warden, further proceedings to discuss a

budget and case management plan for Danks’ case were conducted confidentially. After supplemental

materials discussed at the confidential hearing are received by the Court, a separate order will be issued

and filed under seal establishing a budget and case management plan for Phase I of the litigation.

FOR GOOD CAUSE SHOWN,

1. Danks’ federal petition for a writ of habeas corpus shall be filed on or before September 15,

2011.

2. The Warden shall lodge the state record in this case no later than May 10, 2011, accompanied

by a filed index.

11dp223.OFollPhaseICMC.Dnk.wpd 2

Case 1:11-cv-00223-JLT Document 14 Filed 03/18/11 Page 2 of 3
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

3. Phase I of the litigation shall terminate on April 30, 2011 and Phase IIshall commence on May

1, 2011.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 18, 2011 

 /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill 

 Lawrence J. O’Neill

United States District Judge

11dp223.OFollPhaseICMC.Dnk.wpd 3

Case 1:11-cv-00223-JLT Document 14 Filed 03/18/11 Page 3 of 3