Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

Contreras v. Davis

United States District Court, E.D. California

December 11, 2019

JORGE CONTRERAS, Petitioner,
v.
RONALD DAVIS, Warden of California State Prison at San Quentin, Respondent.

         DEATH PENALTY CASE

          ORDER SETTING INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

          HON. STANLEY A. BOONE JUDGE

         On October 28, 2019, Petitioner Jorge Contreras, a state prisoner facing capital punishment, commenced this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 by filing requests for appointment of counsel to represent him (Doc. No. 1) and to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. No. 2).

         On November 6, 2019, the Court issued an order referring the case to the Selection Board for the Eastern District of California for recommendation of counsel and granting Petitioner's request to proceed in forma pauperis. (Doc. No. 9.)

         On November 7, 2019, Deputy Attorney General Christina Hitomi Simpson filed her notice of appearance on behalf of Respondent, Ron Davis, Warden of California State Prison at San Quentin. (Doc. No. 11.)

         On November 25, 2019, the Selection Board recommended that attorneys Brian M. Pomerantz and Ken Murray be appointed to represent Petitioner.

         Accordingly, 1. On January 23, 2020, at 10:00 a.m., the undersigned will hold the initial case management conference. The parties may appear by teleconference. Counsel are directed to contact the Court's Courtroom Deputy Clerk, Mamie Hernandez, to advise that they will be appearing telephonically and to obtain the teleconference number and pass code.

         2. Petitioner's counsel shall be prepared to discuss the due date for filing the federal habeas petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 and any intention of seeking tolling.

         3. Respondent's counsel shall be prepared to discuss a date for filing the answer or other responsive pleading as well as setting a date for electronic lodging of the state court record as described in Local Rule 191(h)(1) and consistent with the timeframe provided therein. The Court's expectation regarding lodging of the state record is that:

a. Respondent's counsel shall file a Notice of Lodging and lodge the state court record in electronic (optical character recognition) format on the Court's electronic filing system, each item of the state court record shall be lodged as an attachment to the Notice of Lodging, for each separate attachment the Notice of Lodging shall identify the attachment number and the Bate-stamp numbers and the name of that part of the record including its internal pagination if any, the identical identifying information shall also be included as the docket title of each electronically lodged attachment to the Notice of Lodging, to the extent possible each separate paper volume of the state court record shall be lodged as one attachment,
b. State sealed records shall be lodged in paper form, and
c. Respondent's counsel need not lodge the state court record on CDs and courtesy copies on CD are not required.

         4. Counsel for Petitioner and Respondent shall meet and confer regarding the above scheduling and other matters and file not later than one (1) week prior to the case management conference a joint statement summarizing their discussions including matters upon which they agree and their respective positions in the event of disagreement.

         5. At the conclusion of the case management conference, Respondent's counsel will be excused and the conference will continue ex parte with counsel for Petitioner present to discuss budgeting matters including requirements of: the Criminal Justice Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3006A (“CJA”) Policies and Procedures of the Judicial Council of the Ninth Circuit;[1] the Guidelines for Administering the CJA and Related Statutes, Volume 7, Part A, Guide to Judiciary Policy;[2] and applicable requirements of the Guide to Case Management and Budgeting in Capital Habeas Cases in the Eastern District of California Fresno Division.[3] In accordance with the CJA Guidelines, counsel must submit a budget. Counsel shall work with Ninth Circuit Case Managing Attorney Jennifer Naegele to prepare a proposed initial litigation budget for Court review. Counsel may reach Ms. Naegele at jnaegele@ce9.uscourts.gov or at (415) 355-8986. Counsel will receive instructions for using eVoucher to submit budgets and claims for compensation from Ms. Naegele. Counsel shall submit the completed budget including supporting documentation through ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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