Case: In re Von Staich

In re Ivan Von Staich

Petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed. Emergency Stay Requested.

Petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed. Emergency Stay Requested.

Order filed. The People of the State of California are named as respondents to the above-captioned petition for writ of habeas corpus, which has been assigned to Division Two of this court. The court asks that you serve and file points and authorities in opposition to the petition within 15 days from the date of this letter. The opposition should address Petitioner's claim that prison officials and staff are failing to protect him and other inmates at San Quentin State Prison from the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, the opposition should inform the court about the CDCR's broader efforts to control the spread of COVID-19 in all state prisons located within the First Appellate District. The opposition need not address any other claims raised in the petition. Petitioner will be permitted to file an optional reply to the opposition within 15 days from filing of the opposition.

Order filed. The People of the State of California are named as respondents to the above-captioned petition for writ of habeas corpus, which has been assigned to Division Two of this court. The court asks that you serve and file points and authorities in opposition to the petition within 15 days from the date of this letter. The opposition should address Petitioner's claim that prison officials and staff are failing to protect him and other inmates at San Quentin State Prison from the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, the opposition should inform the court about the CDCR's broader efforts to control the spread of COVID-19 in all state prisons located within the First Appellate District. The opposition need not address any other claims raised in the petition. Petitioner will be permitted to file an optional reply to the opposition within 15 days from filing of the opposition.

Requested - extension of time. Opposition filed. Requested for 06/18/2020 By 20 Day(s).

Requested - extension of time. Opposition filed. Requested for 06/18/2020 By 20 Day(s).

Granted - extension of time. Opposition filed. Due on 06/18/2020 By 20 Day(s).

Granted - extension of time. Opposition filed. Due on 06/18/2020 By 20 Day(s).

Filed document entitled: Petitioner's "Ex Parte Motion for Injunctive Relief and Protection Orders from CDCR San Quentin Guards Who Would Retaliate Against Petitioner for Filing this Habeas Petition Based on Guards Failure to Fix Constitutional Violations Regarding a Completely Broken Medical System and Guards Who Refuse to Wear Protective Mask or Gloves During a World-Wide (Covid-19 Pandemic)".

Filed document entitled: Petitioner's "Ex Parte Motion for Injunctive Relief and Protection Orders from CDCR San Quentin Guards Who Would Retaliate Against Petitioner for Filing this Habeas Petition Based on Guards Failure to Fix Constitutional Violations Regarding a Completely Broken Medical System and Guards Who Refuse to Wear Protective Mask or Gloves During a World-Wide (Covid-19 Pandemic)".

Opposition filed.

Opposition filed.

Request for judicial notice filed. Petitioner's "Motion Requesting Court Take Judicial Notice Of News Reports Definitively Revealing Covid-19 Pandemic Outbreak At San Quentin State Prison; Memorandum Of Points And Authorities In Support Of Motion".

Request for judicial notice filed. Petitioner's "Motion Requesting Court Take Judicial Notice Of News Reports Definitively Revealing Covid-19 Pandemic Outbreak At San Quentin State Prison; Memorandum Of Points And Authorities In Support Of Motion".

Reply filed to:

Reply filed to:

Note: copy of Petitioner's "Ex Parte Motion for Injunctive Relief and Protection Orders from CDCR San Quentin Guards Who Would Retaliate Against Petitioner for Filing this Habeas Petition Based on Guards Failure to Fix Constitutional Violations Regarding a Completely Broken Medical System and Guards Who Refuse to Wear Protective Mask or Gloves During a World-Wide (Covid-19 Pandemic)" sent to the Office of the Attorney General this date.

Note: copy of Petitioner's "Ex Parte Motion for Injunctive Relief and Protection Orders from CDCR San Quentin Guards Who Would Retaliate Against Petitioner for Filing this Habeas Petition Based on Guards Failure to Fix Constitutional Violations Regarding a Completely Broken Medical System and Guards Who Refuse to Wear Protective Mask or Gloves During a World-Wide (Covid-19 Pandemic)" sent to the Office of the Attorney General this date.

Note: copy of Petitioner's "Motion Requesting Court Take Judicial Notice Of News Reports Definitively Revealing Covid-19 Pandemic Outbreak At San Quentin State Prison; Memorandum Of Points And Authorities In Support Of Motion" emailed to respondent's counsel this date.

Note: copy of Petitioner's "Motion Requesting Court Take Judicial Notice Of News Reports Definitively Revealing Covid-19 Pandemic Outbreak At San Quentin State Prison; Memorandum Of Points And Authorities In Support Of Motion" emailed to respondent's counsel this date.

Order filed. BY THE COURT:. In a petition for writ of habeas corpus filed in pro per on May 8, 2020, Petitioner seeks his immediate release from San Quentin State Prison due to unsafe, overcrowded conditions at the prison during the COVID-19 pandemic. At our request, the Attorney General filed an informal response on June 17, 2020. Petitioner submitted his in pro per reply on June 29, 2020. Since his initial petition, Petitioner has submitted related motions for injunctive relief, class certification, and judicial notice, along with supporting declarations. More fundamentally, over the past few weeks, San Quentin has suffered a major COVID-19 outbreak resulting in the infection of over 1300 inmates there. Under these changed circumstances, our consideration of Petitioner's claim would benefit from the appointment of counsel for Petitioner and further briefing. The Clerk of this Court is directed to serve copies of the petition and all subsequent filings in this case on the First District Appellate Project, which is directed to arrange for the appointment of counsel to represent Petitioner in this habeas proceeding. Within ten (10) days of their appointment, Petitioner's counsel shall file a supplemental petition addressing the claim that prison officials and staff are failing to protect Petitioner from the COVID-19 pandemic, including whether Petitioner is entitled to relief under the Eighth Amendment and whether we may grant Petitioner temporary release pending the disposition of the habeas proceeding (e.g., under Penal Code § 1476 or other authorities). The Attorney General is directed to file an amended informal opposition no more than ten (10) days after the amended petition is filed. Petitioner's reply, if any, is due no more than five (5) days after the amended opposition is filed. Considering the urgency presented by the spread of the COVID-19 virus at San Quentin and the fact that Petitioner's counsel will be newly appointed, the Warden of San Quentin State Prison, the Secretary of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, and the Attorney General, as Respondents' counsel, are hereby ordered: (1) to cooperate with Petitioner's counsel and to take all necessary steps to facilitate the establishment of confidential attorney-client communications, including confidential attorney-client telephone conferences, between counsel and Petitioner Ivan Von Staich; and (2) to furnish Petitioner's counsel with all necessary documents, records, and other information relevant to the claims presented in the petition. The Clerk of this Court is requested to serve this order by mailing certified copies to all parties to this proceeding, to the superior court, and to the First District Appellate Project.

Order filed. BY THE COURT:. In a petition for writ of habeas corpus filed in pro per on May 8, 2020, Petitioner seeks his immediate release from San Quentin State Prison due to unsafe, overcrowded conditions at the prison during the COVID-19 pandemic. At our request, the Attorney General filed an informal response on June 17, 2020. Petitioner submitted his in pro per reply on June 29, 2020. Since his initial petition, Petitioner has submitted related motions for injunctive relief, class certification, and judicial notice, along with supporting declarations. More fundamentally, over the past few weeks, San Quentin has suffered a major COVID-19 outbreak resulting in the infection of over 1300 inmates there. Under these changed circumstances, our consideration of Petitioner's claim would benefit from the appointment of counsel for Petitioner and further briefing. The Clerk of this Court is directed to serve copies of the petition and all subsequent filings in this case on the First District Appellate Project, which is directed to arrange for the appointment of counsel to represent Petitioner in this habeas proceeding. Within ten (10) days of their appointment, Petitioner's counsel shall file a supplemental petition addressing the claim that prison officials and staff are failing to protect Petitioner from the COVID-19 pandemic, including whether Petitioner is entitled to relief under the Eighth Amendment and whether we may grant Petitioner temporary release pending the disposition of the habeas proceeding (e.g., under Penal Code § 1476 or other authorities). The Attorney General is directed to file an amended informal opposition no more than ten (10) days after the amended petition is filed. Petitioner's reply, if any, is due no more than five (5) days after the amended opposition is filed. Considering the urgency presented by the spread of the COVID-19 virus at San Quentin and the fact that Petitioner's counsel will be newly appointed, the Warden of San Quentin State Prison, the Secretary of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, and the Attorney General, as Respondents' counsel, are hereby ordered: (1) to cooperate with Petitioner's counsel and to take all necessary steps to facilitate the establishment of confidential attorney-client communications, including confidential attorney-client telephone conferences, between counsel and Petitioner Ivan Von Staich; and (2) to furnish Petitioner's counsel with all necessary documents, records, and other information relevant to the claims presented in the petition. The Clerk of this Court is requested to serve this order by mailing certified copies to all parties to this proceeding, to the superior court, and to the First District Appellate Project.

Counsel appointment order filed. FDAP Assistant Director J. Bradley O'Connell and FDAP Staff Attorney Richard Braucher for Ivan Von Staich; supp. petition due 10 days from filing of this appointment order.

Counsel appointment order filed. FDAP Assistant Director J. Bradley O'Connell and FDAP Staff Attorney Richard Braucher for Ivan Von Staich; supp. petition due 10 days from filing of this appointment order.

Petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed. Supplemental Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus *** Immediate Order Requested for Petitioner's Release from CDCR due to COVID-19 ***.

Petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed. Supplemental Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus *** Immediate Order Requested for Petitioner's Release from CDCR due to COVID-19 ***.

Request filed to: *** Immediate Action Requested ***. Notice of Requests for Immediate Action on: (1) Petitioner's Request for Temporary Release Pending Final Determination of Habeas Proceedings; and (2) Issuance of an Order to Show Cause.

Request filed to: *** Immediate Action Requested ***. Notice of Requests for Immediate Action on: (1) Petitioner's Request for Temporary Release Pending Final Determination of Habeas Proceedings; and (2) Issuance of an Order to Show Cause.

Exhibits lodged. Appendix to Supplemental Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus.

Exhibits lodged. Appendix to Supplemental Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus.

Opposition filed. Amended Informal Opposition.

Opposition filed. Amended Informal Opposition.

Requested - extension of time. Reply filed to:. Requested for 08/07/2020 By 2 Day(s).

Requested - extension of time. Reply filed to:. Requested for 08/07/2020 By 2 Day(s).

Granted - extension of time. Reply filed to:. Due on 08/07/2020 By 2 Day(s).

Granted - extension of time. Reply filed to:. Due on 08/07/2020 By 2 Day(s).

Reply filed to:

Reply filed to:

Exhibits lodged. Appendix to Petitioner's Reply to Amended Informal Opposition (Exhibits M through R).

Exhibits lodged. Appendix to Petitioner's Reply to Amended Informal Opposition (Exhibits M through R).

Order filed. BY THE COURT:. The court has reviewed the parties' briefing on the supplemental petition for writ of habeas corpus filed July 23, 2020, and has the following directions and comments:. 1. The court will conduct a case-management conference at 3:00 p.m. on Wednesday, August 12, 2020. The conference will take place by video using the BlueJeans videoconference system. The court will provide participants with the necessary login information in advance of the hearing. 2. Participants should be prepared to discuss disposition of the. following two issues presented by the supplemental petition:. a. Petitioner Von Staich's request for immediate supervised. quarantine and release from San Quentin State Prison pending resolution of this habeas proceeding, including details about how, and to where, such quarantine and release might occur. b. Petitioner's request for declaratory relief, under Article I,. Section 17 of the California Constitution, requiring the release of all San Quentin inmates whose age or health conditions put them at enhanced risk from COVID-19, including public-health experts' recommendation to reduce San Quentin's inmate population by fifty percent or more. 3. In addition, participants should be prepared to discuss the. possibility of expeditious mediation and settlement of these issues, including potential mediators to whose appointment the parties would stipulate or whom the court might otherwise designate. 4. To facilitate discussion and speedy resolution of these issues, and in. addition to counsel for the parties, the court invites and strongly encourages, the attendance and participation of:. a. Catherine Lhamon, Legal Affairs Secretary in the Office of the. Governor, or her designee. b. Appropriate representatives of the California Department of. Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) and San Quentin State Prison. c. Donald Specter, Executive Director of the Prison. Law Office, as amicus curiae. 5. Participants may raise additional issues pertinent to. this habeas proceeding. ___________________. [Before] Kline, P.J., Richman, J., and Stewart, J.

Order filed. BY THE COURT:. The court has reviewed the parties' briefing on the supplemental petition for writ of habeas corpus filed July 23, 2020, and has the following directions and comments:. 1. The court will conduct a case-management conference at 3:00 p.m. on Wednesday, August 12, 2020. The conference will take place by video using the BlueJeans videoconference system. The court will provide participants with the necessary login information in advance of the hearing. 2. Participants should be prepared to discuss disposition of the. following two issues presented by the supplemental petition:. a. Petitioner Von Staich's request for immediate supervised. quarantine and release from San Quentin State Prison pending resolution of this habeas proceeding, including details about how, and to where, such quarantine and release might occur. b. Petitioner's request for declaratory relief, under Article I,. Section 17 of the California Constitution, requiring the release of all San Quentin inmates whose age or health conditions put them at enhanced risk from COVID-19, including public-health experts' recommendation to reduce San Quentin's inmate population by fifty percent or more. 3. In addition, participants should be prepared to discuss the. possibility of expeditious mediation and settlement of these issues, including potential mediators to whose appointment the parties would stipulate or whom the court might otherwise designate. 4. To facilitate discussion and speedy resolution of these issues, and in. addition to counsel for the parties, the court invites and strongly encourages, the attendance and participation of:. a. Catherine Lhamon, Legal Affairs Secretary in the Office of the. Governor, or her designee. b. Appropriate representatives of the California Department of. Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) and San Quentin State Prison. c. Donald Specter, Executive Director of the Prison. Law Office, as amicus curiae. 5. Participants may raise additional issues pertinent to. this habeas proceeding. ___________________. [Before] Kline, P.J., Richman, J., and Stewart, J.

Argument order sent. Case Management Conference August 12, 2020 at 3:00 p.m. (see 8/10/20 order).

Argument order sent. Case Management Conference August 12, 2020 at 3:00 p.m. (see 8/10/20 order).

Received: Petitioner's von Staich's "Declaration by Ivan Von Staich Filed In Support Of Appointed Attorney's Reply To Informal Response" and "Motion Requesting Judicial Notice Of Exhaustion In The Marin County Superior Court Case No SC212566A".

Received: Petitioner's von Staich's "Declaration by Ivan Von Staich Filed In Support Of Appointed Attorney's Reply To Informal Response" and "Motion Requesting Judicial Notice Of Exhaustion In The Marin County Superior Court Case No SC212566A".

Filed letter from: Julie A. Malone, Supervising Deputy Attorney General, dated 8/11/20, re: Notice of Appearance for Case Management Conference. She will also be appearing for Respondent along with Deputy Attorney General Kathleen Walton.

Filed letter from: Julie A. Malone, Supervising Deputy Attorney General, dated 8/11/20, re: Notice of Appearance for Case Management Conference. She will also be appearing for Respondent along with Deputy Attorney General Kathleen Walton.

Request filed to: Counsel for Petitioner's Request for Access to Recording of August 12, 2020, Case Management Conference (email link requested).

Request filed to: Counsel for Petitioner's Request for Access to Recording of August 12, 2020, Case Management Conference (email link requested).

Issued order to show cause. In a supplemental petition for writ of habeas corpus filed with the assistance of counsel on July 23, 2020, Petitioner alleges the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) has violated the federal and California constitutional proscriptions against "cruel and unusual punishment" by remaining deliberately indifferent in its failure to protect Petitioner and other San Quentin State Prison inmates from the COVID-19 pandemic. Petitioner alleges he is medically vulnerable, has been infected with COVID-19, and remains double-celled with another, symptomatic COVID-19 infected inmate. Petitioner also seeks his immediate temporary, supervised release from San Quentin pending resolution of this habeas proceeding. The Attorney General filed an amended informal response on July 31, 2020, contesting each of Petitioner's arguments. In addition to multiple procedural arguments, the Attorney General states Petitioner has received "proper medical treatment," his COVID-19 infection has now been "resolved," and he has now "fully recovered." The Attorney General also argues that, though no relief is warranted, any preliminary relief we grant concerning Petitioner's custody should not exceed, for example, moving Petitioner to a single-occupancy cell or transferring him into quarantine. Petitioner filed an informal reply on August 7, 2020, reiterating his claims. Considering the parties' arguments, the evidence, and the urgency of the situation, Petitioner has stated a prima facie case for relief under article I, section 17 of a California Constitution. IT IS ORDERED, therefore, that:. 1. The Warden of San Quentin State Prison show cause before this court why the relief requested in the supplemental petition should not be granted. 2. Pending disposition of this habeas proceeding, Petitioner shall be transferred to a suitable quarantine location within San Quentin State Prison or, if the Warden determines that is not possible, Petitioner shall be temporarily released to a suitable quarantine location outside San Quentin State Prison that permits continued supervision of Petitioner by CDCR. In either event, the location of Petitioner's quarantine shall not endanger Petitioner, other inmates, prison staff, or the public. (See People v. Romero (1994) 8 Cal.4th 728, 744 [which provides that where a petition has apparent merit and "there is some urgency?the court may order that the petitioner be temporarily released from custody"].). 3. The parties shall file, by 5:00 p.m. on Tuesday, August 18, 2020, simultaneous letter briefs providing a thorough and definitive explanation of Petitioner's current health condition. This order to show cause is to be filed and served on or before August 14, 2020. Any return must be served and filed within ten (10) days of the issuance of this order to show cause. Petitioner may serve and file a traverse within five (5) days after the respondent files the return. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.386(b,) (c,) (d).) The order to show cause shall be deemed served upon mailing by the clerk of this court of certified copies of this order to all parties to this proceeding and to the superior court. The justices will be familiar with the facts and issues, will have conferred among themselves on the case, and will not require oral argument. If oral argument is requested, the request must be served and filed on or before August 24, 2020. If any party timely serves and files a request, oral argument on this cause will be held at a date, time and by means to be announced before Division Two of this court. If no request for oral argument is filed, the matter will be submitted at such time as the court approves the waiver and the time for filing all briefs and papers has expired. (California Rules of Court, rules 8.256(d)(1,) 8.386(g)(1).).

Issued order to show cause. In a supplemental petition for writ of habeas corpus filed with the assistance of counsel on July 23, 2020, Petitioner alleges the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) has violated the federal and California constitutional proscriptions against "cruel and unusual punishment" by remaining deliberately indifferent in its failure to protect Petitioner and other San Quentin State Prison inmates from the COVID-19 pandemic. Petitioner alleges he is medically vulnerable, has been infected with COVID-19, and remains double-celled with another, symptomatic COVID-19 infected inmate. Petitioner also seeks his immediate temporary, supervised release from San Quentin pending resolution of this habeas proceeding. The Attorney General filed an amended informal response on July 31, 2020, contesting each of Petitioner's arguments. In addition to multiple procedural arguments, the Attorney General states Petitioner has received "proper medical treatment," his COVID-19 infection has now been "resolved," and he has now "fully recovered." The Attorney General also argues that, though no relief is warranted, any preliminary relief we grant concerning Petitioner's custody should not exceed, for example, moving Petitioner to a single-occupancy cell or transferring him into quarantine. Petitioner filed an informal reply on August 7, 2020, reiterating his claims. Considering the parties' arguments, the evidence, and the urgency of the situation, Petitioner has stated a prima facie case for relief under article I, section 17 of a California Constitution. IT IS ORDERED, therefore, that:. 1. The Warden of San Quentin State Prison show cause before this court why the relief requested in the supplemental petition should not be granted. 2. Pending disposition of this habeas proceeding, Petitioner shall be transferred to a suitable quarantine location within San Quentin State Prison or, if the Warden determines that is not possible, Petitioner shall be temporarily released to a suitable quarantine location outside San Quentin State Prison that permits continued supervision of Petitioner by CDCR. In either event, the location of Petitioner's quarantine shall not endanger Petitioner, other inmates, prison staff, or the public. (See People v. Romero (1994) 8 Cal.4th 728, 744 [which provides that where a petition has apparent merit and "there is some urgency?the court may order that the petitioner be temporarily released from custody"].). 3. The parties shall file, by 5:00 p.m. on Tuesday, August 18, 2020, simultaneous letter briefs providing a thorough and definitive explanation of Petitioner's current health condition. This order to show cause is to be filed and served on or before August 14, 2020. Any return must be served and filed within ten (10) days of the issuance of this order to show cause. Petitioner may serve and file a traverse within five (5) days after the respondent files the return. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.386(b,) (c,) (d).) The order to show cause shall be deemed served upon mailing by the clerk of this court of certified copies of this order to all parties to this proceeding and to the superior court. The justices will be familiar with the facts and issues, will have conferred among themselves on the case, and will not require oral argument. If oral argument is requested, the request must be served and filed on or before August 24, 2020. If any party timely serves and files a request, oral argument on this cause will be held at a date, time and by means to be announced before Division Two of this court. If no request for oral argument is filed, the matter will be submitted at such time as the court approves the waiver and the time for filing all briefs and papers has expired. (California Rules of Court, rules 8.256(d)(1,) 8.386(g)(1).).

Letter brief filed. Petitioner: Ivan Von Staich. Attorney: L. Richard Braucher. letter brief providing a thorough and definitive explanation of Petitioner's current health condition. (due by 5:00 p.m.).

Letter brief filed. Petitioner: Ivan Von Staich. Attorney: L. Richard Braucher. letter brief providing a thorough and definitive explanation of Petitioner's current health condition. (due by 5:00 p.m.).

Exhibits lodged. Respondent's Exhibits 5-16.

Exhibits lodged. Respondent's Exhibits 5-16.

Letter brief filed. Respondent: The People. Attorney: Office of the Attorney General. letter brief providing a thorough and definitive explanation of Petitioner's current health condition. (due by 5:00 p.m.)w/Exhibits 1-4.

Letter brief filed. Respondent: The People. Attorney: Office of the Attorney General. letter brief providing a thorough and definitive explanation of Petitioner's current health condition. (due by 5:00 p.m.)w/Exhibits 1-4.

Filed letter from: Dep. Attorney General Kathleen Walton, dated August 19, 2020, re: Status Update in Response to the August 14, 2020 Order.

Filed letter from: Dep. Attorney General Kathleen Walton, dated August 19, 2020, re: Status Update in Response to the August 14, 2020 Order.

Note: email link of case management conference sent to counsel for petitioner this date.

Note: email link of case management conference sent to counsel for petitioner this date.

Request for oral argument filed by: Deputy Attorney General Kathleen R. Walton, counsel for respondent (available to argue on September 1, 8, 9, 15, 22, 25, or 29).

Request for oral argument filed by: Deputy Attorney General Kathleen R. Walton, counsel for respondent (available to argue on September 1, 8, 9, 15, 22, 25, or 29).

Written return filed. Exhibits 1-20 attached.

Written return filed. Exhibits 1-20 attached.

Motion filed. Petitioner's Motion To Enforce This Court's August 14, 2020, OSC Order That The CDCR Transfer Petitioner To A Suitable Quarantine Location.

Motion filed. Petitioner's Motion To Enforce This Court's August 14, 2020, OSC Order That The CDCR Transfer Petitioner To A Suitable Quarantine Location.

Order filed. On August 21, 2020, petitioner filed "Motion To Enforce This Court's August 14, 2020, OSC Order That The CDCR Transfer Petitioner To A Suitable Quarantine Location." By noon on or before August 26, 2020, respondent is directed to file an opposition or response to petitioner's motion and to provide the available options for a suitable quarantine location for petitioner.

Order filed. On August 21, 2020, petitioner filed "Motion To Enforce This Court's August 14, 2020, OSC Order That The CDCR Transfer Petitioner To A Suitable Quarantine Location." By noon on or before August 26, 2020, respondent is directed to file an opposition or response to petitioner's motion and to provide the available options for a suitable quarantine location for petitioner.

Requested - extension of time. Traverse to return filed. Requested for 08/28/2020 By 2 Day(s).

Requested - extension of time. Traverse to return filed. Requested for 08/28/2020 By 2 Day(s).

Granted - extension of time. Traverse to return filed. Due on 08/28/2020 By 2 Day(s).

Granted - extension of time. Traverse to return filed. Due on 08/28/2020 By 2 Day(s).

Application to file amicus curiae brief filed by: Application and Brief on Behalf of Amici Curiael American Civil Liberties Union of Norther California and Criminal Justice Scholars.

Application to file amicus curiae brief filed by: Application and Brief on Behalf of Amici Curiael American Civil Liberties Union of Norther California and Criminal Justice Scholars.

Opposition filed. Respondent's Opposition To Motion Regarding This Court's August 14, 2020, Order.

Opposition filed. Respondent's Opposition To Motion Regarding This Court's August 14, 2020, Order.

Filed letter from: J. Bradley O'Connell and L. Richard Braucher, counsel for petitioner, dated August 26, 2020, re: Petitioner's Request to Enforce Court's August 14 Order. (see full text of letter).

Filed letter from: J. Bradley O'Connell and L. Richard Braucher, counsel for petitioner, dated August 26, 2020, re: Petitioner's Request to Enforce Court's August 14 Order. (see full text of letter).

Order filed. The application of the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California and Criminal Justice Scholars for leave to file an amicus curiae brief in support of petitioner, Ivan Von Staich, is GRANTED. (Cf. Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.487(e).) The Clerk of this Court is directed to file said brief attached to the application forthwith. Respondent may file a response to the amicus curiae brief on or before Friday, September 4, 2020, no later than 5:00 p.m.

Order filed. The application of the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California and Criminal Justice Scholars for leave to file an amicus curiae brief in support of petitioner, Ivan Von Staich, is GRANTED. (Cf. Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.487(e).) The Clerk of this Court is directed to file said brief attached to the application forthwith. Respondent may file a response to the amicus curiae brief on or before Friday, September 4, 2020, no later than 5:00 p.m.

Email sent to: Counsels regarding BlueJeans Best Practices and Link Information for Oral Argument on Tuesday, September 8, 2020 at 1:30 p.m.

Email sent to: Counsels regarding BlueJeans Best Practices and Link Information for Oral Argument on Tuesday, September 8, 2020 at 1:30 p.m.

Amicus curiae brief filed by: Amicus curiae for petitioner: American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California. Attorney: Hadar Aviram. Amicus curiae for petitioner: Criminal Justice Scholars (brief attached to the application filed on 8/25/2020).

Amicus curiae brief filed by: Amicus curiae for petitioner: American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California. Attorney: Hadar Aviram. Amicus curiae for petitioner: Criminal Justice Scholars (brief attached to the application filed on 8/25/2020).

Email sent to: All counsel regarding BlueJeans test run on Friday, September 4, 2020 at 10:00 a.m.

Email sent to: All counsel regarding BlueJeans test run on Friday, September 4, 2020 at 10:00 a.m.

Filed document entitled: Office of the State Public Defender's Letter of Amicus Curiae Supporting Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus.

Filed document entitled: Office of the State Public Defender's Letter of Amicus Curiae Supporting Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus.

Order filed. The application of the Office of the State Public Defender for leave to file an amicus curiae brief in support of petitioner, Ivan Von Staich, is GRANTED. (Cf. Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.487(e).) The Clerk of this Court is directed to file said brief attached to the application forthwith. Respondent may file a response to the amicus curiae brief on or before Friday, September 4, 2020, no later than 5:00 p.m.

Order filed. The application of the Office of the State Public Defender for leave to file an amicus curiae brief in support of petitioner, Ivan Von Staich, is GRANTED. (Cf. Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.487(e).) The Clerk of this Court is directed to file said brief attached to the application forthwith. Respondent may file a response to the amicus curiae brief on or before Friday, September 4, 2020, no later than 5:00 p.m.

Traverse to return filed.

Traverse to return filed.

Exhibits lodged. Appendix to Petitioner's Traverse (Exhibits 1-12).

Exhibits lodged. Appendix to Petitioner's Traverse (Exhibits 1-12).

Filed letter from: J. Bradley O'Connell (FDAP,) dated 8/31/20, re: Request to Split Oral Argument between him and FDAP colleague Richard Braucher.

Filed letter from: J. Bradley O'Connell (FDAP,) dated 8/31/20, re: Request to Split Oral Argument between him and FDAP colleague Richard Braucher.

Case on conference list. 20-9.

Case on conference list. 20-9.