Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_11-cv-00914/USCOURTS-azd-2_11-cv-00914-0/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

27

28

WO KM

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Timothy Paul Olmos,

Petitioner, 

vs.

Charles L. Ryan, et al., 

Respondents. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 11-914-PHX-GMS (MEA)

ORDER

Petitioner Timothy Paul Olmos, who is confined in the Arizona State Prison ComplexEyman, has filed a pro se Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254

and an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. In a June 7, 2011 Order, the Court

granted the Application to Proceed and dismissed the Petition because Petitioner has

proceedings still pending in state court. 

On June 16, 2011, Petitioner filed a Motion for Reconsideration (Doc. 8). Petitioner

argues that because the claims in his Petition have been exhausted, he should be allowed to

proceed with his federal habeas petition. Petitioner’s assertion is incorrect. The Court may

not consider Petitioner’s federal habeas claims until all proceedings in the state courts have

concluded, regardless of whether Petitioner’s federal claims are exhausted. See Sherwood

v. Tomkins, 716 F.2d 632, 634 (9th Cir. 1983) (even where claim to be challenged has been

finally settled in state courts, petitioner must await outcome of his appeal in state court before

Case 2:11-cv-00914-GMS--MEA Document 9 Filed 06/28/11 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

27

28

- 2 -

remedies are exhausted); Schnepp v. Oregon, 333 F.2d 288 (9th Cir. 1964) (per curiam)

(pending post-conviction proceedings precluded grant of writ of habeas corpus). The Court

will deny Petitioner’s Motion for Reconsideration.

IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner’s June 16, 2011 Motion for Reconsideration

(Doc. 8) is denied.

DATED this 28th day of June, 2011.

Case 2:11-cv-00914-GMS--MEA Document 9 Filed 06/28/11 Page 2 of 2