Webster v. Ornoski, et al
Petitioner: Larry J Webster
Respondent: S. W. Ornoski
Case Number: 2:1993cv00306
Filed: January 11, 2010
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Office: Sacramento Office
Presiding Judge: Dale A. Drozd
Presiding Judge: Lawrence K. Karlton
Nature of Suit: Death Penalty - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Ptn for Writ of H/C - Stay of Execution
RSS Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
August 26, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 494 AMENDED ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 8/26/14. The findings and recommendations filed June 4, 2014 (ECF No. 480 ) are adopted in full. Petitioners application for a writ of habeas corpus is GRA NTED on the grounds that he was denied effective assistance of counsel in connection with the penalty phase of his trial. Petitioner's sentence of death shall be vacated and a lesser sentence imposed that is consistent with state law, unless the state commences a new penalty trial within 90 days of the filed date of this order. Petitioners application is DENIED in all other respects. No certificate of appealability shall issue.(Dillon, M)
July 3, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 484 ORDER signed by Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 7/3/2014 ORDERING: Respondent's objections to the findings and recommendations due on or before 7/21/2014; Respondent's reply to petitioner's objections due on or before 8/5/2014; and Petitioner's reply to Respondent's objections due on or before 8/11/2014/(Donati, J)
June 4, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 480 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 6/4/14 recommending that petitioners petition for a writ of habeas corpus be granted on the grounds that he received ineffective assistance of counsel in connection with the pen alty phase of his trial in violation of his rights under the Sixth Amendment, as alleged in Claim 22 of his petition. Federal habeas relief should be denied in all other respects. Referred to Judge Lawrence K. Karlton; Objections to F&R due within 30 days.(Dillon, M)
July 21, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 475 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 07/20/11 ordering that the time for filing respondent's responsive pleading is extended through and including 08/19/11; and petitioner's reply brief shall be filed on or before 09/15/11. (Plummer, M)
May 27, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 470 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 5/26/11 GRANTING 469 Motion. The briefing schedule set forth in this Courts 4/5/11, Order with regard to the petitioners claim that the California capital sentencing system fails to adequately narrow the pool of death-eligible cases shall be modified as follows: 6/3/11: Petitioners brief in support of the claim; 7/20/11: Respondent's brief; 8/10/11: Petitioner's reply brief. (Dillon, M)
April 18, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 466 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 4/15/2011 ORDERING that w/in 20 days, ea party to file a brief addressing the impact of Cullen v. Pinholster, No. 09-1088, 2011 WL 1225705 (U.S. Apr. 4, 2011) on these proceedings and, in particular, on the status of the evidence already presented to this court. (Yin, K)
April 6, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 465 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 4/5/11 ORDERING that the following shall be the briefing schedule with regard to the petitioners claim that the California capital sentencing system fails to adequately narrow the pool of death-eligible cases: May 15, 2011: Petitioners brief in support of the claim; July 1, 2011: Respondents brief ; July 20, 2011: Petitioners reply brief.(Dillon, M)
February 3, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 460 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 2/2/2011 ORDERING the scheduling order for ptnr's claim that CA statutory scheme fails to adequately narrow application of the death penalty is MODIFIED as to respondent's opposition/objecti ons to ptnr's evidence and respondent's witness designations, declarations, and exhibits to be filed on or before 2/23/2011; depositions of witnesses to be completed by 4/25/2011; the parties to submit a joint proposed briefing schedule w/ respect to this claim w/in 10 days of the final submission of all evidence relating thereto. (Yin, K)
January 10, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 457 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 1/7/11 granting 456 Motion to modify the scheduling order. Respondents opposition or objections to Petitioners evidence and Respondents witness designations, declarations, and exhibits shall be fil ed on or before January 24, 2011. Depositions of the witnesses, if necessary, shall be completed by March 25, 2011. The parties shall submit a joint proposed briefing schedule with respect to this claim to the Court within ten days of the final submission of all evidence relating thereto. (Dillon, M)
November 18, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 455 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 11/18/10 ORDERING the scheduling order for Petitioner's claim that CA's statutory scheme fails to adequately narrow application of the death penalty is MODIFIED as follows: respondent's opposition or objections to Petitioner's evidence and Respondent's witness designations, declarations, and exhibits shall be filed on or before 12/17/10; depositions of the witnesses shall be completed by 2/14/11; and parties shall submit a joint proposed schedule with respect to this Court within 10 days of the final submission of all evidence relating thereto. (Carlos, K)
October 18, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 453 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 10/18/10 GRANTING Respondent's 452 Motion to Modify Scheduling Order. The 449 Scheduling Order is modified as follows: Respondent's opposition or objections to Petitioner's evidence and Respondent's witness designations, declarations, and exhibits due by 11/17/10; deposition of the witnesses shall be completed by 1/14/11; joint proposed briefing schedule with respect to this claim due within 10 days of the final submission of all evidence relating thereto. (Owen, K)
January 11, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 437 REVISED BRIEFING SCHEDULE 435 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 1/11/2010 ORDERING 433 Respondent shall file a post-evidentiary hearing brief on petitioner's claim that he was denied meaningful appellate review on or before 2 /1/2010. Petitioner may file a reply with respect to this claim, if any, on or before 2/21/2010. No further briefing on this claim shall be submitted absent further order of the court. Respondent will be permitted to file a response brief to petition er's brief in support of select habeas claims on or before 2/15/2010. That brief shall not exceed 10 pages in length. Petitioner may file a reply brief, if any, on or before 3/1/2010. Such a reply brief shall not exceed 5 pages in length. No further briefing on this issue shall be submitted absent further order of the court. (Reader, L)
October 28, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 430 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 10/27/2009 GRANTING 429 Motion to modify the briefing schedule; petitioners post-evidence briefing on the appellate process claim shall be filed on or before 11/16/09; respondents post-evidence briefing shall be filed on or before 12/31/09; petitioners reply brief shall be filed on or before 1/19/2010. (Suttles, J)
September 2, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 426 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 09/02/09 ordering the briefing schedule is set and/or modified as follows: Respondent shall file an answer to the remaining claims on or before 10/15/09. Petitioner shall file a response on or before 11/30/09. Petitioner shall file a post-evidence brief on the claim that he was denied meaningful appellate review in violation of the Eighth Amendment on or before 11/02/09. Respondent shall file a post-evidence brief on or before 12/17/09. Petitioner shall file a reply, if any, on or before 01/19/10. (Plummer, M)
Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the California Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Webster v. Ornoski, et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Larry J Webster
Represented By: Timothy John Foley
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: S. W. Ornoski
Represented By: Ward Allen Campbell
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?