Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_03-cv-05819/USCOURTS-caed-1_03-cv-05819-22/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

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

On May 1, 2015, Respondent filed a motion seeking to continue the evidentiary hearing, 

currently set on June 23, 2015. (Doc. 102) Respondent cited the need to obtain medical records, to 

locate witnesses and to secure an expert as grounds for the continuance. Id. at 1-2. However, certain 

statements made in the motion made it unclear whether Petitioner agreed or disagreed with the request 

and, as a result, on May 7, 2015, the Court held a telephonic conference with counsel to clarify.

At the conference, counsel for Petitioner, Ms. Phillips, indicated that Mr. Williams objects to 

the continuance and informed the Court she was prepared to proceed in June. Ms. Phillips reported 

also she provided Respondent all of the medical records—approximately 700 pages worth—

approximately two weeks ago. Ms. Phillips explained that she obtained the records years ago via 

subpoena and was unaware Respondent did not have them.

Mr. Riley, Deputy Attorney General, explained that, due to the imminent hearing date and the 

inadequate time for an expert to review the records and be prepared for hearing, he had been unable to 

TOMMY RAY WILLIAMS,

 Petitioner,

v.

MIKE KNOWLES, Warden,

Respondent.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:03-cv-05819-JLT

ORDER AFTER TELEPHONIC CONFERENCE 

RE: RESPONDENT’S REQUEST TO CONTINUE 

THE HEARING DATE FOR EVIDENTIARY 

HEARING 

(Doc. 102)

Case 1:03-cv-05819-JLT Document 105 Filed 05/07/15 Page 1 of 2
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

secure the services of an expert. In addition, Mr. Riley explained that he was having difficulty in 

obtaining approval to hire the expert, due to budget constraints. However, he reiterated his belief that 

an extension of time to September would enable Respondent to be prepared to proceed.

ORDER

While noting Petitioner’s objection, the Court ORDERS:

1. To allow Respondent to be prepared to counter Petitioner’s evidence, the request to 

continue the hearing is GRANTED. The hearing will be reset either to September 15 and 16 or 

September 16 and 17, 2015 depending upon the availability of the experts, witnesses and counsel; 

2. Counsel SHALL file a stipulation, no later than May 29, 2015, indicating their 

agreement to proceed either on September 15 and 16 or September 16 and 17, 2015;

3. No further continuances of the evidentiary hearing will be entertained except upon a 

showing of extraordinary good cause.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 7, 2015 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:03-cv-05819-JLT Document 105 Filed 05/07/15 Page 2 of 2