Garduno v. McDonald
Filing
9
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 10/24/11 ORDERING that 3 Motion to Proceed IFP is DENIED; Clerk of the Court rename the petition for writ of habeas corpus filed in this case Amended Petition and file it, and petitioners September 14, 2011 motion for a stay, in CIV-S-11-0469 CKD P; and this case is CLOSED.(Dillon, M)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
STEVEN LAWRENCE GARDUNO,
11
Petitioner,
12
13
No. CIV S-11-1835 CKD P
vs.
MICHAEL D. MCDONALD,
14
Respondent.
15
ORDER
/
16
Petitioner, a California prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a petition for writ of
17
habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. He challenges convictions entered in the Superior Court
18
of Sacramento County in 2009.
19
A review of court records in Garduno v. McDonald, CIV-S-11-0469 CKD P
20
reveals that petitioner has a petition for writ of habeas corpus pending in this court in which he
21
also challenges his 2009 Sacramento County convictions. Pursuant to the Ninth Circuit Court of
22
Appeals’ decision in Woods v. Carey, 525 F.3d 886, 890 (9th Cir. 2008), the court will order that
23
the petition filed in this case be identified as an “amended petition” and filed in CIV-S-11-0469
24
CKD P. Petitioner has filed a motion for a stay in this action which will also be transferred to
25
CIV-S-11-0469 CKD P. The court will order that this case be closed.
26
/////
1
1
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
2
1. Petitioner’s July 14, 2011 motion to proceed in forma pauperis is denied;
3
2. The Clerk of the Court rename the petition for writ of habeas corpus filed in
4
this case “Amended Petition” and file it, and petitioner’s September 14, 2011 motion for a stay,
5
in CIV-S-11-0469 CKD P; and
6
7
2. This case is closed.
Dated: October 24, 2011
8
_____________________________________
CAROLYN K. DELANEY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
9
10
11
12
13
1
gard1835.trn
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2
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?