Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-02004/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-02004-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JARMAAL LARONDE SMITH,

Petitioner, No. CIV S- 07-2004 LKK GGH P

vs.

LEANNE CRONES, et al., 

Respondents. ORDER

 /

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of

habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner has unnecessarily complicated this

proceeding by filing conflicting requests. In sum, by Order, filed on 11/20/07, this court had

directed respondent to file a response to petitioner’s application within thirty days from the date

of that order. However, in response to a request by petitioner, filed on 11/30/07, the court

vacated the Order, filed on 11/20/07, and dismissed the petition with leave granted for petitioner

to file an amended petition, setting forth all exhausted and unexhausted claims and directing

petitioner to file a motion for the court to hold the proceedings in abeyance pending exhaustion

of state court remedies as to the unexhausted claims. Subsequently, the court, on 12/18/07,

issued an Order directing respondent’s attention to the 12/10/07 Order, and denying as moot

respondent’s request for an extension of time to file a response to the petition.

Case 2:07-cv-02004-AK Document 12 Filed 12/21/07 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

However, petitioner’s latest filing, on 12/17/07, indicates that he is unable to show

the requisite good cause for having failed to exhaust state court remedies as to any unexhausted

claim and now wishes to proceed only as to the grounds set forth in the original petition. The

court will now vacate its Order, filed on 12/10/07, and re-set the briefing of this matter;

petitioner is cautioned to make no further request to modify the manner in which this

matter should proceed. 

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that:

1. The Order, filed on 12/10/07, is VACATED;

2. Respondents are directed to file a response to petitioner’s original petition

within thirty days from the date of this order. See Rule 4, Fed. R. Governing § 2254 Cases. An

answer shall be accompanied by any and all transcripts or other documents relevant to the

determination of the issues presented in the application. See Rule 5, Fed. R. Governing § 2254

Cases;

3. Petitioner’s reply, if any, shall be filed and served within thirty days of service

of an answer;

4. If the response to petitioner’s application is a motion, petitioner’s opposition or

statement of non-opposition shall be filed and served within thirty days of service of the motion,

and respondents’ reply, if any, shall be filed within fifteen days thereafter.

DATED: 12/21/07

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

 

GREGORY G. HOLLOWS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

GGH:009

smit2004.rsp

Case 2:07-cv-02004-AK Document 12 Filed 12/21/07 Page 2 of 2