United States District Court, D. Nevada
L. VALLADARES Federal Public Defender ARMILLA STALEY-NGOMO
Assistant Federal Public Defender Attorney for Petitioner
MICHAEL DEAN ADKISSON
UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE REPLY
TO ANSWER ORDER
Michael Dean Adkisson moves this Court for an extension of
time of sixty (60) days from April 28, 2017, to and including
June 27, 2017, to file his Reply to Respondents' Answer.
This motion is based upon the attached declaration of counsel
and the files and records in this case.
OF ARMILLA STALEY-NGOMO
ARMILLA STALEY-NGOMO, hereby declare under penalty of perjury
that the following is true and correct:
August 25, 2015, Mr. Adkisson filed an Amended Petition and
Supporting Exhibits in this matter. ECF 16-21. On August 27,
2015, Assistant Federal Public Defender Melanie Gavisk filed
a Notice of Change of Attorney. ECF 23. Ms. Gavisk had
previously filed a Notice of Representation on July 2, 2015.
ECF 13. On February 10, 2016, Mr. Adkisson filed his Second
Amended Petition, Supporting Exhibits, and a Notice of Manual
Filing. ECF 28-30. On May 16, 2016, Respondents filed their
Motion to Dismiss and Supporting Exhibits. ECF 36-42. On
August 1, 2016, Mr. Adkisson filed his Opposition to
Respondents' Motion to Dismiss. ECF 45. On August 4,
2016, Respondents filed their Reply to the Opposition. ECF
46. On February 13, 2017, this Court issued an order denying
Respondents' Motion to Dismiss. ECF No. 48. Respondents
filed their Answer on March 29, 2017. ECF No. 49. Mr.
Adkisson's Reply to Respondent's Answer is currently
due on April 28, 2017.
to Ms. Gavisk's impending departure from my office, I
(Armilla Staley-Ngomo) filed a Notice of Appearance in this
matter on August 9, 2016. ECF 47. However, I was on maternity
leave from July 25, 2016 through October 26, 2016, and was
unable to work on this matter during that period of time.
Because of reorganization in the Federal Public
Defender's Office, I was newly assigned nearly twenty
cases upon my return from maternity leave in October of 2016
which have required my attention.
specifically, I have been assigned several pre-petition
habeas corpus matters, at least four of which have AEDPA time
remaining on their claims. These pre-petition matters have
resulted in numerous initial client visits at various Nevada
state prisons over a condensed period of time, including at
High Desert State Prison in Indian Springs; Northern Nevada
Correctional Center in Reno; Lovelock Correctional Center in
Lovelock; and Ely State Prison in Ely. In addition, the
client visits in Reno, Ely and Lovelock necessitate a flight
to and an overnight stay in Reno, as my offices are located
in Las Vegas.
Nevada Department of Corrections currently houses Mr.
Adkisson at the Northern Nevada Correctional Center in Reno.
For the reasons stated above, I was unable to travel to visit
Mr. Adkisson in person until March 16, 2017. I also have a
previously scheduled visit with four clients at Ely State
Prison this week, as well as to visit two clients at High
Desert State Prison and two clients at Lovelock Correctional
Center over the coming weeks.
requested extension of time is therefore necessary in order
to effectively and thoroughly represent Mr. Adkisson. This is
a complex habeas corpus matter involving a second degree
murder conviction. I need additional time to review the
voluminous files and records in this case related to Mr.
Adkisson's extensive trial, post-conviction, and
appellate court proceedings-which span over a period of
twelve years. Mr. Adkisson's federal habeas record also
includes a second amended petition that is 48 pages in
length, including 148 supporting exhibits totaling more than
2, 650 pages, and an answer that is 64 pages in length.
addition, I have been busy working on other pressing
deadlines, including: several amended petitions, at least
four of which have AEDPA time remaining on their claims; a
federal habeas petition filed last month that involved murder
and attempted murder counts and has a second amended petition
due in June; a reply to an answer filed earlier this month;
another federal habeas corpus petition involving the violent
habitual felon statute filed earlier this month; two
oppositions to motions to dismiss due next month; and a Ninth
Circuit argument in June.
the reasons stated above, as well as the files and records in
this case, I ask this Court to grant my request for an
extension of time of sixty (60) days and order the Reply to
the Answer to be filed on or before June 27, 2017. This
motion is not filed for the purposes of delay but in the
interests of justice, as well as in the ...