From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Letner v. Davis

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jul 10, 2020
Case No. 1:18-cv-01459-NONE-SAB (E.D. Cal. Jul. 10, 2020)

Opinion

Case No. 1:18-cv-01459-NONE-SAB

07-10-2020

RICHARD LACY LETNER, Petitioner, v. RONALD DAVIS, Warden of San Quentin State Prison, Respondent.


DEATH PENALTY CASE

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS GRANTING MOTION FOR STAY AND ABEYANCE PENDING STATE EXHAUSTION PROCEEDINGS

Petitioner Richard Lacy Letner, a state prisoner facing capital punishment, proceeds through appointed counsel Michael Snedeker and Lisa Short on the habeas corpus petition filed December 19, 2019 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.

Before the court is petitioner's March 19, 2020 motion to stay federal proceedings pursuant to Rhines v. Weber, 544 U.S. 269 (2005), to allow state court exhaustion of claims and allegations in the mixed petition. Respondent Warden Ronald Davis, through counsel Deputy Attorney General Galen Farris, filed an opposition to the motion on April 3, 2020, and petitioner replied on April 10, 2020.

On May 29, 2020, the magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations recommending that petitioner's motion be granted. (Doc. No. 57.) The findings and recommendations were served on the parties and contained notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen (14) days of service. (Id. at 10.) Respondent has not objected or otherwise responded to the findings and recommendations and the time for doing so has passed.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis.

Accordingly,

1. The findings and recommendations issued on May 29, 2020 (Doc. No. 57) are adopted in full;

2. Petitioner's motion to stay federal proceeding pending resolution of state court proceeding (Doc. No. 52) is granted and any and all scheduled dates in this proceeding are vacated;

3. Petitioner shall pursue state court exhaustion without delay and inform this court within thirty (30) days of a decision by the state court on his exhaustion petition; and

4. The case is referred back to the magistrate judge for further proceedings.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 10 , 2020

/s/_________

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Letner v. Davis

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jul 10, 2020
Case No. 1:18-cv-01459-NONE-SAB (E.D. Cal. Jul. 10, 2020)
Case details for

Letner v. Davis

Case Details

Full title:RICHARD LACY LETNER, Petitioner, v. RONALD DAVIS, Warden of San Quentin…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Jul 10, 2020

Citations

Case No. 1:18-cv-01459-NONE-SAB (E.D. Cal. Jul. 10, 2020)

Citing Cases

Cowan v. Davis

; Letner v. Davis, No. 1:18-cv-01459 NONE SAB 2020 WL 2792980, at *6 (E.D. Cal. May 29, 2020), adopted by,…