Ansley v. Foulk

Filing 7

ORDER to SHOW CAUSE signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 5/30/2017 ORDERING, within 30 days, petitioner shall file a response to this order showing cause why the court should not lift the stay and dismiss petitioner's ineffective assistance of counsel claim as unexhausted due to petitioner's failure to comply with the prior court order. (Yin, K)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

EDWARD ANSLEY,

11

No. 2:14-cv-02376 CKD P

Petitioner,

12

v.

13

FRED FOULK,

14

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Respondents.

15
16

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding through counsel with a petition for writ of habeas

17

corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging his 2011 conviction for possession of a sharp

18

instrument while a prisoner.

19

On October 9, 2014, petitioner filed the instant mixed petition which contained both

20

exhausted and unexhausted claims. ECF No. 1. On October 28, 2014, petitioner was ordered to

21

advise the court how he wished to proceed on his mixed petition. See ECF No. 3 at 2 (explaining

22

the available options). Petitioner filed a motion to stay the instant habeas petition pursuant to

23

Rhines v. Weber, 544 U.S. 269 (2005), in order to exhaust his state court remedies with respect to

24

his ineffective assistance of counsel claim. ECF No. 4.

25

On December 11, 2014, the court granted petitioner’s motion for a stay of proceedings

26

pursuant to Rhines. ECF No. 6. In that order, the court required petitioner to file a request to lift

27

the stay within thirty days from the date of a decision by the California Supreme Court

28

concluding state habeas review. Id. Petitioner was cautioned that failure to timely inform the
1

1

court of the status of petitioner’s claim in state court would result in a dismissal of the federal

2

claim. Id. Petitioner has failed to file any status reports or a motion to lift the stay as required by

3

the court’s December 10, 2014 order.

4

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, within thirty (30) days from the date of

5

this order, petitioner shall file a response to this order showing cause why the court

6

should not lift the stay and dismiss petitioner’s ineffective assistance of counsel claim as

7

unexhausted due to petitioner’s failure to comply with the prior court order.

8

Dated: May 30, 2017

_____________________________________
CAROLYN K. DELANEY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

12/ansl2376.osc.docx

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2