Briggs v. Fresno Superior Court et al

Filing 16

ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES 1:12-cv-1549-SKO(HC) and 1:13-cv-00592-BAM(HC); ORDER DIRECTING the Clerk to CLOSE Action Number 1:13-cv-00592-BAM(HC); ORDER DIRECTING the Parties to File in the Future all Documents in Action Number 1:12-cv-1549-SKO(HC) signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 4/29/2013. (Sant Agata, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

JOHNNY LEE BRIGGS,

)
)
Petitioner,
)
v.
)
)
FRESNO SUPERIOR COURT,
)
et al.,
)
)
Respondents.
)
______________________________)
)
JOHHNY LEE BRIGGS,
)
)
Petitioner,
)
)
v.
)
)
C. GIBSON,
)
)
Respondent.
)
)

1:12-cv-01549-SKO-HC
1:13-CV-00592-BAM-HC
ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES
1:12-cv-01549-SKO-HC
AND 1:13-cv-00592-BAM-HC
ORDER DIRECTING THE CLERK
TO CLOSE ACTION NUMBER
1:13-cv-00592-BAM-HC
ORDER DIRECTING THE PARTIES TO
FILE IN THE FUTURE ALL DOCUMENTS
IN ACTION NUMBER 1:12-cv-01549SKO-HC

20
Petitioner Johnny Lee Briggs is proceeding pro se and in
21
forma pauperis in action number 1:13-cv-00592-BAM-HC with a
22
petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.
23
The matter has been referred to the Magistrate Judge pursuant to
24
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Rules 302 and 303.

Pending

25
before the Court is the petition, which was filed on April 24,
26
2013.
27
Rule 4 of the Rules Governing § 2254 Cases in the United
28
1

1

States District Courts (Habeas Rules) requires the Court to make

2

a preliminary review of each petition for writ of habeas corpus.

3

The Court must summarily dismiss a petition "[i]f it plainly

4

appears from the petition and any attached exhibits that the

5

petitioner is not entitled to relief in the district court....”

6

Habeas Rule 4; O’Bremski v. Maass, 915 F.2d 418, 420 (9th Cir.

7

1990); see also Hendricks v. Vasquez, 908 F.2d 490 (9th Cir.

8

1990).

9

From screening the petition in case number 1:13-cv-00592-

10

BAM-HC, it appears that the petition concerns the same detention

11

that is presently before the Court in Johnny Lee Briggs v. Fresno

12

Superior Court, case number 1:12-cv-01549-SKO-HC, another habeas

13

corpus proceeding that is awaiting screening.

14

Accordingly, the Court EXERCISES its discretion pursuant to

15

Fed. R. Civ. P. 42(a)1 to consolidate the two habeas corpus

16

actions for all purposes so that the cases may be screened

17

together, and the exact nature of the claims for relief may be

18

determined.

19

Accordingly, it IS ORDERED that

20

1. Actions number 1:12-cv-01549-SKO-HC and 1:13-cv-00592-

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1

Fed. R. Civ. P. 42(a) provides:

If actions before the court involve a common question
of law or fact, the court may:
1) join for hearing or trial any or all matters at
issue in the actions;
2) consolidate the actions; or
3) issue any other orders to avoid unnecessary cost
or delay.
A trial court has broad discretion to consolidate in whole or in part
cases pending in the same district. Investors Research Co. v. United States
District Court for the Central District of California, 877 F.2d 777 (9th Cir.
1989).

2

1
2

BAM-HC are CONSOLIDATED for all purposes; and
2. Pending further order of the Court, the parties are

3

DIRECTED to file all future papers in action number 1:12-cv-

4

01549-SKO-HC with a caption of Johnny Lee Briggs v. Fresno

5

Superior Court, et al.; and

6

3. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to file all future papers

7

in action number 1:12-cv-01549-SKO-HC, and to close action number

8

1:13-cv-00592-BAM-HC.

9
10

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
10c20k

April 29, 2013

/s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3