(HC)(DP) Hillhouse v. Broomfield

United States District Court for the Eastern District of California

(HC)(DP) Hillhouse v. Broomfield

Trial Court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DANNIE RAY HILLHOUSE, No. 2:03-CV-0142-MCE-DMC 12 Petitioner, DEATH PENALTY CASE 13 v. ORDER 14 TRAVIS PENNINGTON, 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding with appointed counsel, brings this petition 18 for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 2254

. Pending before the Court are the 19 following unopposed motions: (1) Petitioner’s motion to substitute respondent following 20 Petitioner’s transfer to the California Institute for Men, ECF No. 307; and (2) Petitioner’s motion 21 for a 45-day extension of time to file Petitioner’s merits brief, ECF No. 306. 22 Good cause appearing therefor, Petitioner’s motion to substitute will be granted. 23 See Rumsfeld v. Padilla,

542 U.S. 426, 434

(2004) (the proper respondent in a federal habeas case 24 is the person who has custody of the petitioner); see also

28 U.S.C. § 2242

; Rule 2(a), Rules 25 Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts. 26 Good cause also appearing therefor, Petitioner’s motion for an extension of time to 27 file Petitioner’s merits brief will be granted. 28 / / / ] Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows: 2 1. Petitioner’s motion to substitute, ECF No. 307, is GRANTED. 3 2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to substitute Travis Pennington for the 4 || current respondent in this case, as reflected in the caption above. 5 3. Petitioner’s motion for an extension of time, ECF No. 306, is GRANTED. 6 4. Petitioner’s merits briefing is due by July 29, 2024. 7 5. The due dates for Respondent’s briefing and Petitioner’s reply are extended 8 | by 45 days. 9 10 || Dated: June 18, 2024 Ss..c0_, DENNIS M. COTA 2 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Reference

Status
Unknown