From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Chatman v. Evans

United States District Court, E.D. California
Feb 9, 2011
No. CIV S-10-0264 KJM KJN (TEMP) P (E.D. Cal. Feb. 9, 2011)

Opinion

No. CIV S-10-0264 KJM KJN (TEMP) P.

February 9, 2011


ORDER


On December 10, 2010, petitioner filed a motion for leave to file an amended petition for writ of habeas corpus, a proposed amended petition, and a request that this action be stayed so petitioner can exhaust state court remedies with respect to the new claim presented in the amended petition. On January 12, 2011, the court recommended that petitioner's original habeas petition be dismissed as time-barred. If the original petition is dismissed as time-barred, the only claim that would remain in the amended petition is the new, unexhausted claim, and this court cannot stay a habeas petition which contains no exhausted claims.Raspberry v. Garcia, 448 F.3d 1150, 1154 (9th Cir. 2006). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner's motion to amend and motion for a stay (#21) are denied. Petitioner may renew his motions if the district court judge assigned to this case rejects this court's recommendation that petitioner's original habeas petition be dismissed as time-barred.

DATED: February 8, 2011


Summaries of

Chatman v. Evans

United States District Court, E.D. California
Feb 9, 2011
No. CIV S-10-0264 KJM KJN (TEMP) P (E.D. Cal. Feb. 9, 2011)
Case details for

Chatman v. Evans

Case Details

Full title:LARRY A. CHATMAN, Petitioner, v. M.S. EVANS, et al., Respondents

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: Feb 9, 2011

Citations

No. CIV S-10-0264 KJM KJN (TEMP) P (E.D. Cal. Feb. 9, 2011)