Dodd v. Howell

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7 DISTRICT OF NEVADA

8 * * * 9 SHAUNNA L. DODD, Case No. 2:21-cv-01398-GMN-EJY

10 Petitioner, ORDER

11 v. 12 JERRY HOWELL, et al., 13 Respondents. 14

15 16 This court granted 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petitioner Shaunna L. 17 Dodd’s motion for appointment of counsel and appointed the Federal Public Defender to 18 represent petitioner (ECF No. 10). The Federal Public Defender has filed a Notice of 19 Conflict (ECF No. 12). 20 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Jessie Folkestad is appointed to represent 21 Shaunna L. Dodd in these proceedings. Ms. Folkestad’s contact information appears 22 below: 23 Jessie Folkestad 10120 W. Flamingo Road 24 Suite 4 Las Vegas, NV 89147 25 725-800-8327 Jfolkestadesq@gmail.com. 26 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Federal Public Defender is released as 27 1 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Jessie Folkestad, a Criminal Justice Act panel 2 attorney for the United States District Court, District of Nevada, will represent petitioner 3 in all future proceedings in this court relating to this matter (including subsequent 4 actions) and appeals therefrom, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3006A (a)(2)(B), until allowed 5 to withdraw. 6 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk ELECTRONICALLY SERVE CJA 7 counsel Jessie Folkestad a copy of this order, together with a copy of the petition for 8 writ of habeas corpus (ECF No. 1-1). CJA counsel has 20 days from the date of entry of 9 this order to file a notice of appearance. 10 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that CJA counsel for petitioner meet with petitioner 11 as soon as reasonably possible to: (a) review the procedures applicable in cases under 12 28 U.S.C. § 2254; (b) discuss and explore with petitioner, as fully as possible, the 13 potential grounds for habeas corpus relief in petitioner's case; and (c) advise petitioner 14 that all possible grounds for habeas corpus relief must be raised at this time and that 15 the failure to do so will likely result in the omitted grounds being barred from future 16 review under the rules regarding abuse of writ. 17 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that counsel for petitioner file an amended petition 18 for writ of habeas corpus within 90 days of the date of her appearance that includes all 19 known grounds for relief (both exhausted and unexhausted). 20 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondents file a response to the petition 21 within 90 days of service of the petition. Petitioner will then have 45 days from service 22 of the answer, motion to dismiss, or other response to file a reply or opposition. Any 23 other motions will be subject to the normal briefing schedule under the local rules. 24 Any response to the petition must comport with Habeas Rule 5. Additionally:

25 1. Any procedural defenses raised by respondents in this case must be raised 26 27 together in a single, consolidated motion to dismiss. In other words, the court seriatum fashion in multiple successive motions to dismiss or embedded in the 1 answer. Procedural defenses omitted from the motion to dismiss will be subject 2 3 to potential waiver. 4 2. Respondents must not file a response in this case that consolidates their 5 procedural defenses, if any, with their response on the merits, except under 28 6 U.S.C. § 2254(b)(2) as to any unexhausted claims clearly lacking merit. If 7 respondents do seek dismissal of unexhausted claims under § 2254(b)(2): (a) 8 they must do so within the single motion to dismiss, not in the answer, and (b) 9 10 they must specifically direct their argument to the standard for dismissal under § 11 2254(b)(2) set forth in Cassett v. Stewart, 406 F.3d 614, 623–24 (9th Cir. 2005). 12 In short, no procedural defenses, including exhaustion, should be included with 13 the merits in an answer. All procedural defenses, including exhaustion, must 14 instead be raised by motion to dismiss. 15 3. In any answer filed on the merits, respondents must specifically cite to and 16 address the applicable state-court written decision and state-court record 17 18 materials, if any, regarding each claim within the response as to that claim; and 19 4. Respondents must file a set of state court exhibits relevant to the response filed 20 to the petition. Those exhibits must be filed chronologically and be accompanied 21 by a separate index of exhibits identifying the exhibits by number. The CM/ECF 22 attachments that are filed must be identified by the number or numbers of the 23 exhibits in the attachment. The purpose of this provision is to allow the court and 24 any reviewing court thereafter to quickly determine from the face of the electronic 25 26 docket sheet which numbered exhibits are filed in which attachments. 27 5. Notwithstanding Local Rule LR IC 2-2(g), respondents must send a hard copy of 1 2 all pleadings and indices of exhibits ONLY filed for this case to the Clerk of 3 Court, 400 S. Virginia St., Reno, NV, 89501, directed to the attention of “Staff 4 Attorney” on the outside of the mailing address label. 5 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner’s motion for status (ECF No. 13) is 6 DENIED as moot. 7 8

9 DATED: 1 June 2022. 10 11

12 GLORIA M. NAVARRO UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 13

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27