Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_97-cv-00152/USCOURTS-caed-2_97-cv-00152-98/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

DANIEL BRODERICK, Bar #89424

Federal Defender

TIVON SCHARDL, Fla. Bar #73016

Trial & Habeas Counsel

801 I Street, 3rd Floor

Sacramento, California 95814

Telephone: 916-498-6666

E-mail: Tim_Schardl@fd.org

TIM BROSNAN, Bar #75938

1116 Guerrero Street

San Francisco, California 94110

Telephone: 415-285-5417

Attorneys for Petitioner

LANCE IAN OSBAND

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LANCE IAN OSBAND,

 Petitioner, 

v.

WARDEN, San Quentin State Prison,

 Respondent.

______________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

NO. CIV-S-97-0152 KJM

CAPITAL CASE

ORDER SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE 

On October 11, 2011, this Court held a hearing regarding the effects of Cullen v. Pinholster,

563 U.S. ___, 131 S. Ct. 1388 (2011). Each party appeared through counsel. Having determined

that it is appropriate at this time to consider whether 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d) bars relief for the claims

on which an evidentiary hearing was granted, the court directed the parties to meet and confer and

propose a briefing schedule. The parties did so and filed a joint statement reflecting their

agreement. Having considered the briefs and joint statement, the court finds the proposed schedule

is appropriate and should be adopted.

No later than January 26, 2012, Petitioner shall file an opening brief addressing the

application of § 2254(d) to Claims I, V, IX, and XX. Although the evidentiary hearing was ordered

Order Setting Briefing Schedule Osband v. Warden, CIV S-97-0152 KJM

Case 2:97-cv-00152-KJM-CSK Document 614 Filed 10/20/11 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

on only a portion of some claims, Petitioner shall address the claims in toto, as they were presented

to the California Supreme Court. See Pinholster, 131 S. Ct. at 1398 (“review under §2254(d)(1) is

limited to the record that was before the state court that adjudicated the claim on the merits”).

No later than April 25, 2012, Respondent shall file an answer brief.

No later than June 24, 2012, Petitioner shall file any reply. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 19, 2011.

Order Setting Briefing Schedule Osband v. Warden, CIV S-97-0152 KJM

Case 2:97-cv-00152-KJM-CSK Document 614 Filed 10/20/11 Page 2 of 2