Hastings v. Gipson

Filing 37

ORDER DENYING 36 Petitioner's Motion to Proceed signed by Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 11/1/2016. (Jessen, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

KERRY DANA HASTINGS,
Petitioner,

12

ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S
MOTION TO PROCEED

v.

13
14

Case No. 1:14-cv-01271-LJO-EPG-HC

CONNIE GIPSON,

15

(ECF No. 36)

Respondent.

16
17

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se whose petition for writ of habeas corpus

18 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 was dismissed without prejudice on August 25, 2015 for being a
19 mixed petition containing an unexhausted claim. (ECF No. 26). On August 8, 2016, the Court
20 denied Petitioner’s Rule 60(b) motion for relief from judgment. (ECF No. 30). On September 2,
21 2016, Petitioner filed a notice of appeal, and the appeal is now pending before the Ninth Circuit.
22 See Hastings v. Gipson, No. 16-16569.
23

On October 18, 2016, Petitioner filed the instant motion to proceed with the federal

24 habeas petition in this case, asserting that all of his claims are now properly exhausted. (ECF No.
25 36). The Court previously dismissed the petition in the instant case without prejudice. If
26 Petitioner wishes to proceed with a federal habeas petition, Petitioner may do so by filing a new
27 petition with the Court.
28 ///

1

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner’s motion to proceed is

2 DENIED.
3
4
5

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____

November 1, 2016

UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2