IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
March 28, 2013
THURMAN LEROY SPENCER, PETITIONER,
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, RESPONDENT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Kendall J. Newman United States Magistrate Judge
Petitioner requests an extension of time to file objections to the undersigned's March 11, 2013 findings and recommendations, due to petitioner's recent transfer and the current inaccessibility of his legal materials. For good cause shown, the request will be granted.
Petitioner also requests reassignment of this action to different magistrate and district judges, on the ground that the instant petition presents new issues not addressed in petitioner's prior federal habeas petition. However, as stated in the undersigned's findings and recommendations, notwithstanding the presentation of new issues, see 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (b)(1)(2), the instant action cannot proceed without petitioner first obtaining, from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, authorization for the district court to consider the issues presented in the instant petition. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3). In other words, petitioner may pursue these issues in a new petition filed in the district court only after he has obtained authorization from the Court of Appeals. Id. For these reasons, petitioner's reassignment request is without merit.
Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Petitioner's request that this case be reassigned (Dkt. No. 8), is denied.
2. Petitioner's motion for extension of time (Docket No. 11), is granted.
3. Petitioner shall file his objections to this court's findings and recommendations within thirty (30) days from the filing date of this order.
© 1992-2013 VersusLaw Inc.