Olmos v. Ryan et al

Filing 9

ORDER that Petitioner's June 16, 2011 Motion for Reconsideration (Doc. 8) is denied. Signed by Judge G Murray Snow on 6/28/2011.(KMG)

1

WO

KM

2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

Timothy Paul Olmos,

10

Petitioner,

11

vs.

12
Charles L. Ryan, et al.,
13
Respondents.
14

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. CV 11-914-PHX-GMS (MEA)
ORDER

15
16

Petitioner Timothy Paul Olmos, who is confined in the Arizona State Prison Complex-

17

Eyman, has filed a pro se Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254

18

and an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. In a June 7, 2011 Order, the Court

19

granted the Application to Proceed and dismissed the Petition because Petitioner has

20

proceedings still pending in state court.

21

On June 16, 2011, Petitioner filed a Motion for Reconsideration (Doc. 8). Petitioner

22

argues that because the claims in his Petition have been exhausted, he should be allowed to

23

proceed with his federal habeas petition. Petitioner’s assertion is incorrect. The Court may

24

not consider Petitioner’s federal habeas claims until all proceedings in the state courts have

25

concluded, regardless of whether Petitioner’s federal claims are exhausted. See Sherwood

26

v. Tomkins, 716 F.2d 632, 634 (9th Cir. 1983) (even where claim to be challenged has been

27

finally settled in state courts, petitioner must await outcome of his appeal in state court before

28

1

remedies are exhausted); Schnepp v. Oregon, 333 F.2d 288 (9th Cir. 1964) (per curiam)

2

(pending post-conviction proceedings precluded grant of writ of habeas corpus). The Court

3

will deny Petitioner’s Motion for Reconsideration.

4
5
6

IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner’s June 16, 2011 Motion for Reconsideration
(Doc. 8) is denied.
DATED this 28th day of June, 2011.

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-