From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Griffin v. Martinez

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jun 22, 2018
No. 1:17-cv-01137-DAD-JDP (E.D. Cal. Jun. 22, 2018)

Opinion

No. 1:17-cv-01137-DAD-JDP

06-22-2018

ROBERT LEE GRIFFIN, Petitioner, v. JOEL D. MARTINEZ, Respondent.


ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND GRANTING STAY PENDING EXHAUSTION

(Doc. Nos. 9, 17)

Petitioner is proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302 of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California.

On March 29, 2018, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations recommending that petitioner's motion to stay the petition be granted and that the case be held in abeyance pending petitioner's exhaustion of his unexhausted claims in state court. (Doc. No. 17.) The findings and recommendations were served on all parties with notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen days. No objections were filed and the time for doing so has passed.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C), the undersigned has conducted a de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the undersigned concludes that the magistrate judge's findings and recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis.

For these reasons:

1. The findings and recommendations issued March 29, 2018 (Doc. No. 17) are adopted in full;

2. Petitioner's motion to stay the pending petition and hold it in abeyance (Doc. No. 9) is granted;

3. The action is stayed pursuant to Kelly v. Small, 315 F.3d 1063 (9th Cir. 2003), pending exhaustion of state court remedies on petitioner's unexhausted claims;

4. Petitioner shall file a status report every 90 days, commencing with the date of service of this order, detailing petitioner's progress in exhausting his unexhausted claims in state court;

5. Petitioner shall file a motion to lift the stay within 30 days of the California Supreme Court issuing a final order resolving petitioner's unexhausted claims; and

6. Petitioner shall file an amended petition containing all claims, including newly exhausted claims, with his motion to lift the stay.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 22 , 2018

/s/_________

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Griffin v. Martinez

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jun 22, 2018
No. 1:17-cv-01137-DAD-JDP (E.D. Cal. Jun. 22, 2018)
Case details for

Griffin v. Martinez

Case Details

Full title:ROBERT LEE GRIFFIN, Petitioner, v. JOEL D. MARTINEZ, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Jun 22, 2018

Citations

No. 1:17-cv-01137-DAD-JDP (E.D. Cal. Jun. 22, 2018)