ROBLES v. CATE

Full title: JOHALMO ROBLES, Petitioner, v. MATTHEW CATE, Respondents

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

Date published: Jan 11, 2011

No. CIV S-10-3398 GGH P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 11, 2011)

Opinion

No. CIV S-10-3398 GGH P.

January 11, 2011

ORDER

GREGORY HOLLOWS, Magistrate Judge

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding with retained counsel, has filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner has paid the filing fee.

Petitioner has also requested that this federal petition be held in abeyance pending exhaustion of state remedies as a case is pending in the California Supreme Court. However, petitioner has not set forth any arguments demonstrating why this petition should be held in abeyance.¹

1 Petitioner only argues that the federal case should be held in abeyance as petitioner is in the custody of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and is pending deportation. However, it is unclear how pending deportation would be benefitted by holding this case in abeyance.

Within 21 days, petitioner shall file a brief indicating why this petition should be held in abeyance. Within 21 days of petitioner's filing, respondent shall file a reply.

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Within 21 days, petitioner shall file a brief indicating why this petition should be held in abeyance;

2. Within 21 days of petitioner's filing, respondent shall file a reply.

3. The Clerk of the Court shall serve a copy of this order, the consent/reassignment form contemplated by Appendix A(k) to the Local Rules of this court together with a copy of petitioner's application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 on Michael Patrick Farrell, Senior Assistant Attorney General.

DATED: January 11, 2011