Jackson v. Arnold

Filing 13

ORDER Construing Motion for Extension of Time as Motion to Stay Proceedings 12 ; ORDER STAYING Proceedings and Directing Petitioner to File Regular Status Reports, signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 4/13/2018: 30-Day Deadline. (Hellings, J)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 KENNETH A. JACKSON, 12 13 Petitioner, v. 14 15 16 ERIC ARNOLD, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No.: 1:17-cv-01670-JLT (HC) ORDER CONSTRUING MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME AS MOTION TO STAY PROCEEDINGS (Doc. 12) ORDER STAYING PROCEEDINGS AND DIRECTING PETITIONER TO FILE REGULAR STATUS REPORTS 17 18 Petitioner filed a habeas petition in this Court on December 8, 2017. After conducting a 19 preliminary review of the petition, the Court determined that Petitioner had failed to state a claim and 20 had failed to exhaust state remedies. The Court granted him leave to file an amended petition to 21 correct these deficiencies if he could do so. Since then, he has filed motions for extensions of time 22 and stated he was returning to state court to exhaust his state remedies. He seeks an extension of time 23 until the California Supreme Court renders a decision on his petition. Essentially, he is requesting a 24 stay of proceedings until he completes exhaustion of this state remedies. Accordingly, the Court will 25 construe his motion for extension of time as a motion to stay proceedings. 26 27 28 DISCUSSION Traditionally, a district court has had the discretion to stay a petition which it may validly consider on the merits. Calderon v. United States Dist. Court (Taylor), 134 F.3d 981, 987-988 (9th Cir. 1 1 1998); Greenawalt v. Stewart, 105 F.3d 1268, 1274 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 1002 (1997). 2 Granting a stay is appropriate where there is no intention on the part of the Petitioner to delay or 3 harass and in order to avoid piecemeal litigation. Id. 4 Petitioner states he has filed a petition in the California Supreme Court and is currently 5 awaiting a ruling. It appears to the Court that Petitioner is attempting to exhaust his claims in a timely 6 and expeditious manner, and there is no indication that Petitioner intends to harass or delay the 7 proceedings, nor does it appear that Petitioner is engaging in dilatory conduct. Therefore, good cause 8 having been presented, the Court will grant a stay of the proceedings and will hold the petition for writ 9 of habeas corpus in abeyance pending exhaustion of Petitioner’s state remedies. 10 However, the Court will not indefinitely hold the petition in abeyance. See Taylor, 134 F.3d at 11 988 n. 11. No later than 30 days after the date of service of this Order Petitioner must inform the 12 Court of the status of the habeas proceedings in state court, including the dates his cases were filed, the 13 case numbers, and any outcomes.1 Furthermore, Petitioner must proceed diligently to pursue his state 14 court remedies, and every 60 days after the filing of the initial status report Petitioner must file a new 15 status report regarding the status of his state court habeas corpus proceedings. Following final action 16 by the state courts, Petitioner will be allowed 30 days within which to file a motion for leave to amend 17 the instant petition to include the newly exhausted claims. The petition should be titled “First 18 Amended Petition,” and it must set forth only grounds he has exhausted in the state courts. Further, he 19 must state cognizable grounds for relief as discussed in the Court’s screening order of December 18, 20 2017. (Doc. 6.) Failure to comply with these instructions and time allowances will result in this Court 21 vacating the stay nunc pro tunc to the date of this order. 22 ORDER 23 Accordingly, the Court ORDERS: 24 1. Petitioner’s motion for extension of time (Doc. 12) is construed as a motion to stay the 25 26 instant proceedings on his habeas petition; 2. Petitioner motion to stay proceedings is GRANTED and proceedings are STAYED 27 28 1 The filing should be entitled “Status Report.” 2 1 2 pending exhaustion of Petitioner’s state remedies; 3. Petitioner SHALL file a status report within 30 days of the date of service of this order, 3 advising the Court of the status of all pending habeas proceedings filed in state court, the dates when 4 such cases were filed, and any outcomes; 5 6 7 8 4. Petitioner SHALL file a new status report every 60 days after the filing of the initial status report; and 5. Petitioner is GRANTED 30 days following the final order of the state courts within which to file a First Amended Petition to include only exhausted claims. 9 10 11 12 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: April 13, 2018 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?