Crane v. McDonald

Filing 52

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 04/18/11 ordering within 30 days of the date of this order petitioner shall either move to consolidate case nos CIV S-09-0852 FCD EFB P, CIV S-09-1511 EFB P, and CIV S-10-2604 EFB P; or show cause why, absent consolidation, Case Nos CIV S-09-1511 EFB P and CIV S-10-2604 EFB P should not be dismissed for failure to file amended petitions in those cases within the time provide by the court. (Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

RICHARD JOSEPH CRANE,
Petitioner,

11
12
13
14

No. CIV S-10-2604 EFB P
No. CIV S-09-1511 EFB P
No. CIV S-09-0852 EFB P

vs.
MIKE McDONALD,
Respondent.

ORDER
/

15
16

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel seeking a writ of habeas corpus

17

under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. This proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 302 pursuant

18

to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and is before the undersigned pursuant to petitioner’s consent. See 28

19

U.S.C. § 636; see also E.D. Cal. Local Rules, Appx. A, at (k)(4).

20

On January 20, 2011, the court dismissed the petition in Case No. Civ. S-10-2604 EFB P

21

with leave to amend. The court had previously dismissed the petition in Case No. Civ. S-09-

22

1511 EFB P on September 14, 2010. In the order of January 20, 2011, the court granted

23

petitioner leave to amend a single claim raised in Case No. Civ. S-10-2604 EFB P, which

24

petitioner had also raised in Case No. Civ. S-09-1511 EFB P. The court further informed

25

petitioner that, if the only instance of parole denial petitioner wishes to challenge in all three

26

pending case is that of March 1, 2007, he should file a new motion for consolidation in Case No.
1

1

Civ. S-09-0852 FCD EFB P so informing the court. Petitioner has not filed a new motion for

2

consolidation, but has filed his amended petition only in Case No. Civ. S-09-0852 FCD EFB P,

3

challenging solely the March 1, 2007 parole denial.1

4

Accordingly, it is hereby ordered that:

5

1. Within 30 days of the date of this order, petitioner shall either:

6
7

a. Move to consolidate Case Nos. Civ. S-09-0852 FCD EFB P, Civ. S-09-1511
EFB P, and Civ. S-10-2604 EFB P; or

8
9

b. Show cause why, absent consolidation, Case Nos. Civ. S-09-1511 EFB P and
Civ. S-10-2604 EFB P should not be dismissed for failure to file amended petitions in those

10

cases within the time provided by the court.

11

Dated: April 18, 2011.

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

1

Petitioner also includes a claim of alleged retaliation by prison officials in violation of
petitioner’s First Amendment rights. In the court’s order of January 20, 2011, the court informed
petitioner that any such claim could not be raised in a habeas petition and admonished him not to
include it in an amended petition. Accordingly, the court does not consider petitioner’s improper
retaliation claim in this order.
2