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.

Lance Ian Osband v. Warden

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


October 19, 2011

LANCE IAN OSBAND,
PETITIONER,
v.
WARDEN, SAN QUENTIN STATE PRISON,
RESPONDENT.

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 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.

20111019

© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.



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.