Griffith v. Williams ( 2024 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 8 * * * 9 JASON O. GRIFFITH, Case No. 2:23-cv-00853-RFB-BNW 10 Petitioner, Order Directing Service of the Petition v. and Denying Application to Proceed 11 In Forma Pauperis JEREMY BEAN, et al., 12 Respondents. 13 14 Jason O. Griffith filed an amended pro se 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus 15 petition pursuant to this court’s order. (ECF Nos. 6, 8.) He has paid the filing fee; 16 therefore, his second application to proceed in forma pauperis is denied as moot. (ECF 17 No. 7.) The court has conducted a preliminary review of the petition under Rule 4 of the 18 Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts and directs 19 that it be served on respondents. 20 A petition for federal habeas corpus should include all claims for relief of which 21 petitioner is aware. If the Petitioner fails to include such a claim in his petition, he may 22 be forever barred from seeking federal habeas relief upon that claim. See 28 U.S.C. 23 §2244(b) (successive petitions). If the Petitioner is aware of any claim not included in 24 his petition, he should notify the court of that as soon as possible, perhaps by means of 25 a motion to amend his petition to add the claim. 26 /// 27 /// /// 1 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Petitioner’s second application to 2 proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 7) is DENIED as moot. 3 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court electronically SERVE the 4 amended petition (ECF No. 8) on respondents. 5 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk add Aaron D. Ford, Nevada Attorney 6 General, as counsel for respondents and provide respondents an electronic copy of all 7 items previously filed in this case by regenerating the Notice of Electronic Filing to the 8 office of the AG only. 9 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondents file a response to the petition, 10 including potentially by motion to dismiss, within 90 days of service of the petition, with 11 any requests for relief by Petitioner by motion otherwise being subject to the normal 12 briefing schedule under the local rules. Any response filed is to comply with the 13 remaining provisions below, which are entered pursuant to Habeas Rule 5. 14 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any procedural defenses raised by respondents 15 in this case be raised together in a single consolidated motion to dismiss. In other 16 words, the Court does not wish to address any procedural defenses raised herein either 17 in seriatum fashion in multiple successive motions to dismiss or embedded in the 18 answer. Procedural defenses omitted from such motion to dismiss will be subject to 19 potential waiver. Respondents should not file a response in this case that consolidates 20 their procedural defenses, if any, with their response on the merits, except pursuant to 21 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b)(2) as to any unexhausted claims clearly lacking merit. If 22 respondents do seek dismissal of unexhausted claims under § 2254(b)(2): (a) they will 23 do so within the single motion to dismiss not in the answer; and (b) they will specifically 24 direct their argument to the standard for dismissal under § 2254(b)(2) set forth in 25 Cassett v. Stewart, 406 F.3d 614, 623-24 (9th Cir. 2005). In short, no procedural 26 defenses, including exhaustion, should be included with the merits in an answer. All 27 procedural defenses, including exhaustion, instead must be raised by motion to dismiss. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, in any answer filed on the merits, respondents 2 specifically cite to and address the applicable state court written decision and state court record materials, if any, regarding each claim within the response as to that claim. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner has 60 days from service of the answer, motion to dismiss, or other response to file a reply or opposition, with any other 6 requests for relief by respondents by motion otherwise being subject to the normal briefing schedule under the local rules. 8 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any additional state court record exhibits filed 9 herein by either petitioner or respondents be filed with a separate index of exhibits "0 identifying the exhibits by number. The parties will identify filed CM/ECF attachments by " the number of the exhibit in the attachment. Each exhibit will be filed as a separate "2 attachment. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, at this time, the parties send courtesy copies of " any responsive pleading or motion and all INDICES OF EXHIBITS ONLY to the Reno Division of this court. Courtesy copies shall be mailed to the Clerk of Court, 400 16 S. Virginia St., Reno, NV, 89501, and directed to the attention of “Staff Attorney” on the outside of the mailing address label. No further courtesy copies are required unless "8 and until requested by the court. 19 20 DATED: April 16, 2024 21 24 cemaeat RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II 25 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 26 27 28