(HC) Andrade v Cate, No. 2:2009cv02270 - Document 35 (E.D. Cal. 2014)

Court Description: ORDER to SHOW CAUSE signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 6/11/2014 ORDERING that counsel for petitioner shall BOTH file a response to this order, within 7 days, indicating whether they intend to file a notice of withdrawal or whether they intend to continue to represent petitioner notwithstanding the conflict of interest described in this court's 9/24/13 order; Counsel is further DIRECTED to serve a copy of the following documents on petitioner and to file proof of such serv ice with the court within 7 days of this order: 1) the 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition (ECF No. 1 ); 2) the Answer (ECF No. 11 ); 3) the Reply (ECF No. 15 ); 4) the Findings and Recommendations (ECF No. 19 ); 5) the Order (ECF No. 20 ); 6) the Answer (ECF No. 31 ); and, 7) the Supplemental Reply (ECF No. 32 ). (Yin, K)

Download PDF
(HC) Andrade v Cate Doc. 35 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 ADRIAN FRANK ANDRADE, 11 12 13 14 No. 2:09-CV-02270 KJM AC P Petitioner, v. ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE MATTHEW CATE, Respondent. 15 16 Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding with an application for a writ of habeas corpus 17 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. In several pleadings filed with the court, petitioner has complained 18 about the adequacy of retained counsel’s representation of him in the instant case. See ECF Nos. 19 22, 30, 33. In fact, this court granted petitioner’s motion for relief from judgment based on 20 petitioner’s contention that retained habeas counsel had abandoned him and failed to inform him 21 that his § 2254 petition had been denied by this court on January 18, 2012. See ECF No. 24 22 (order granting 60(b) motion). Despite the re-opening of this case on grounds of retained 23 counsel’s abandonment, counsel has continued to file pleadings in this case on petitioner’s behalf. 24 See ECF No. 32 (supplemental reply). While this court is reticent to interfere in attorney-client 25 relationships, the court’s ongoing questions concerning the status of counsel in the pending 26 proceeding preclude it from ruling on pro se motions filed by petitioner. 27 Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 28 1. Counsel for petitioner shall BOTH file a response to this order indicating whether they 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 intend to file a notice of withdrawal or whether they intend to continue to represent petitioner 2 notwithstanding the conflict of interest described in this court’s order of September 24, 2013. 3 Such response shall be filed NO LATER THAN SEVEN DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS 4 ORDER. 5 2. Counsel is further directed to serve a copy of the following documents on petitioner 6 and to file proof of such service with the court within seven days of this order: 1) the 28 U.S.C. 7 § 2254 petition (ECF No. 1); 2) the Answer (ECF No. 11); 3) the Reply (ECF No. 15); 4) the 8 Findings and Recommendations (ECF No. 19); 5) the Order (ECF No. 20); 6) the Answer (ECF 9 No. 31); and, 7) the Supplemental Reply (ECF No. 32). 10 DATED: June 11, 2014 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.