Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_01-cv-03487/USCOURTS-cand-3_01-cv-03487-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Timothy Charles Parle
Petitioner
David L. Runnels
Respondent

Document Text:

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TIMOTHY CHARLES PARLE,

Petitioner,

 v.

DAVID L. RUNNELS, Warden, High Desert

State Prison,

Respondent. /

No. C 01-03487 WHA

ORDER RE BRIEFING

Petitioner Timothy Charles Parle and respondent David L. Runnels are ORDERED TO

BRIEF whether the decision of the state court was an objectively unreasonable application of

Chambers v. Mississippi, 410 U.S. 284 (1973), Taylor v. Kentucky, 436 U.S. 478 (1978), or

other relevant Supreme Court precedent. In particular, how should the Court re-evaluate the

petition in light of the recent Ninth Circuit memorandum, Parle v. Runnels, No. 05-16610 (9th

Cir. April 4, 2006)? 

Briefs of ten pages or less are due at NOON, JUNE 20, 2006. Replies will be due at

NOON, JUNE 27, 2006.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 30, 2006 WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:01-cv-03487-WHA Document 45 Filed 05/30/06 Page 1 of 1