Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_12-cv-02161/USCOURTS-caed-2_12-cv-02161-6/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
James Hartley
Respondent
David G. Leonard
Petitioner

Document Text:

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DAVID G. LEONARD, No. 2:12-CV-2161-MCE-CMK-P

Petitioner, 

vs. ORDER

JAMES HARTLEY,

Respondent.

 /

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this petition for a writ of

habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Pending before the court are: (1) petitioner’s

motion (Doc. 34) for an order permitting discovery; and (2) petitioner’s motion (Doc. 52) for an

extension of time to file a traverse. 

Turning to petitioner’s motion for discovery, petitioner seeks leave of court to

conduct discovery on all of his claims. By way of example, plaintiff would like to discovery

“[r]ecords relating to, or reflecting upon evidence seized, or introduced at trial, reliability of

evidence, or pertaining to evidentiary matters or testimony.” It is clear from his motion that

petitioner is attempting to do exactly what the Supreme Court declared in Cullen v. Pinholster,

131 S.Ct. 1388 (2011), he cannot. Specifically, petitioner is attempting to use this federal habeas

1

Case 2:12-cv-02161-JKS Document 53 Filed 02/24/14 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

action to fish for evidence to support his claims. Notably, petitioner has made no showing

regarding his efforts, if any, to investigate the factual bases of his claims when they were pending

before the state courts. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(e)(2)(A)(ii). The court concludes that petitioner

has failed to demonstrate good cause for an order allowing discovery. See Rule 6(a) of the Rules

Governing Section 2254 Cases. 

Petitioner seeks an extension of time (Doc. 52) to file a traverse. Good cause

appearing therefor, the request will be granted. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Petitioner’s motion for leave to conduct discovery (Doc. 34) is denied; 

2. Petitioner’s motion for an extension of time (Doc. 52) to file a traverse is

granted; and

3. Petitioner may file a traverse within 30 days of the date of this order. 

DATED: February 24, 2014

______________________________________

CRAIG M. KELLISON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2

Case 2:12-cv-02161-JKS Document 53 Filed 02/24/14 Page 2 of 2