Robinson v. Alfaro

Filing 13

ORDER by Judge James Donato granting 11 Motion for Extension of Time to Amend ; granting 12 Motion to Stay (lrcS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/7/2016)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

DWAYNE LAVELL ROBINSON,

Case No. 15-cv-01445-JD

Plaintiff,
8
v.
9
10

SANDRA ALFARO,
Defendant.

Re: Dkt. Nos. 11, 12

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO
STAY AND
ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSING
CASE

12
13

Petitioner has filed an amended motion for a stay of this action so that he may exhaust state

14

court remedies for several claims in his habeas petition that he wishes to present to this Court.

15

The Court GRANTS the motion to stay. Liberally construing the motion, petitioner has shown

16

good cause for his failure to exhaust the claims before filing this action, the claims do not appear

17

patently meritless, and there does not appear to be any intentionally dilatory litigation tactic by

18

petitioner. See Rhines v. Weber, 544 U.S. 269, 277-78 (2005). Petitioner is informed that before

19

he may challenge either the fact or length of his confinement in a habeas petition in this court, he

20

must present to the California Supreme Court any claims he wishes to raise in this Court. See

21

Rose v. Lundy, 455 U.S. 509, 522 (1982) (holding every claim raised in federal habeas petition

22

must be exhausted).
CONCLUSION

23
24
25

1. Petitioner’s motion for an extension (Docket No. 11) is GRANTED and the motion for
a stay is deemed timely filed.

26

2. Petitioner’s motion for a stay (Docket No. 12) is GRANTED and this case is STAYED

27

to allow petitioner to present his unexhausted claim in state court. If petitioner is not granted relief

28

in state court, he may return to this court and ask that the stay be lifted.

1

3. The stay is subject to the following conditions:

2

(1) Petitioner must diligently pursue his state court habeas proceedings; and

3

(2) Petitioner must notify this court within thirty days after the state courts have completed

4

their review of his claim or after they have refused review of his claims.

5

If either condition of the stay is not satisfied, this Court may vacate the stay and act on this

6

petition. See Rhines v. Webber, 544 U.S. 269, 278 (2005) (district court must effectuate timeliness

7

concerns of AEDPA by placing “reasonable limits on a petitioner’s trip to state court and back.”).

8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

The Clerk shall administratively close this case. The closure has no legal effect; it is
purely a statistical matter. The case will be reopened and the stay vacated upon notification by
petitioner in accordance with section (3) above.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: January 7, 2016

13
________________________
JAMES DONATO
United States District Judge

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

3
4

DWAYNE LAVELL ROBINSON,

Case No. 15-cv-01445-JD

Plaintiff,
5
v.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

6
7

SANDRA ALFARO,
Defendant.

8
9
10

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S.
District Court, Northern District of California.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15

That on January 7, 2016, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by
placing said copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by
depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery
receptacle located in the Clerk's office.

16
17
18

Dwayne Lavell Robinson ID: AK-0159
North Kern State Prison A1-229 u
P.O. Box 5000
Delano, CA 93216

19
20
21

Dated: January 7, 2016

22
23

Susan Y. Soong
Clerk, United States District Court

24
25
26
27

By:________________________
LISA R. CLARK, Deputy Clerk to the
Honorable JAMES DONATO

28
3