Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Orange v. Tilton

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


April 24, 2009

EUGENE ORANGE, PETITIONER,
v.
JAMES TILTON, SECRETARY, RESPONDENT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. Anthony J. Battaglia U.S. Magistrate Judge United States District Court

ORDER DIRECTING RESPONDENT TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL ANSWER; SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE

On November 26, 2008, Petitioner filed a First Amended Petition. In his First Amended Petition, he presents three claims. First, he argues that he received ineffective assistance of appellate counsel. (Am. Pet. at 5*fn1 .) Second, Petitioner claims that the trial court erred when it denied Petitioner's motion to suppress evidence obtained in a warrantless search which violated his constitutional rights under the Fourth Amendment. (Id. at 16.) Third, he contends that the court erred in admitting the two notes violating his constitutional right to due process and constitutional right to confrontation. (Id. at 31.) On February 27, 2009, Respondent filed an Answer addressing only the first claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel. Therefore, the Court directs Respondent to file a Supplemental Answer to address the remaining two claims. Respondent shall file a Supplemental Answer on or before May 8, 2009. Petitioner may file a Supplemental Traverse on or before May 22, 2009.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.