King v. Adams et al

Filing 2


Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 ALTON A. KING, 9 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 11 No. C 11-2792 SI Petitioner, ORDER ON INITIAL REVIEW v. DERRAL G. ADAMS, Warden, et al., 12 Respondents. / 13 14 Alton A. King, an inmate at the California State Prison at Corcoran, filed this action for a writ 15 of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. King’s petition is a “mixed” petition; it contains six 16 claims that King exhausted on direct appeal and three claims that King has yet to exhaust through 17 collateral review. This Court may not adjudicate a mixed petition, and ordinarily would be required to 18 dismiss the petition until all of its claims have been exhausted. See Rose v. Lundy, 455 U.S. 509 19 (1982). In his petition, however, King requests that the Court allow him to utilize the stay-and-abeyance 20 procedure of Rhines v. Webber, 544 U.S. 269 (2005), to finish exhausting his claims. 21 A district court may stay a mixed habeas petition to allow the petitioner to exhaust state court 22 remedies as to those claims that have not yet been presented to the state’s highest court. See Rhines, 23 544 U.S. at 277-78. This stay-and-abeyance procedure “is only appropriate when the district court 24 determines there was good cause for the petitioner’s failure to exhaust his claims first in state court,” 25 the claims are not meritless, and there are no intentionally dilatory litigation tactics by the petitioner. 26 Id. 27 King filed his federal habeas petition on June 7, 2011, just one day before the one-year AEDPA 28 statute-of limitations on his claims expired. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d). His petition indicates that he has 1 yet to begin the state court collateral review process. It only briefly describes the “good cause” for his 2 failure to do so, stating only that “his ability to fully develop the facts on this issue has been severely 3 hampered by apparent prosecutorial overreaching.” Petition at 13. 4 Without more, the Court cannot find good cause for King’s failure to exhaust all of his claims. 5 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT King shall file a formal motion to stay this action by 6 July 29, 2011. In his motion, King must fully explain the circumstances that constitute “good cause” 7 for his failure to fully exhaust his habeas petition. 8 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 11 Dated: July 5, 2011 SUSAN ILLSTON United States District Judge 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 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?