Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_03-cv-01876/USCOURTS-cand-5_03-cv-01876-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:1651 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

---

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

Order Denying Motion to Expedite Case; Directing Petitioner to File a Second Amended Petition 

P:\pro-se\sj.jf\hc.03\hudson876misc 1

NOT FOR CITATION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARCUS L. HUDSON,

Petitioner,

 vs.

A.A. LAMARQUE, Warden,

Respondent. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 03-1876 JF (PR)

ORDER DENYING MOTION

TO EXPEDITE CASE;

DIRECTING PETITIONER TO

FILE A SECOND AMENDED

PETITION 

(Docket No. 3)

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, seeks a writ of habeas corpus

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On March 5, 2004, the Court ordered Respondent to show

cause why the petition should not be granted. On April 19, 2004, Respondent filed a

motion to dismiss the petition for failure to exhaust state remedies. Petitioner filed a

traverse opposing the motion to dismiss and a motion to withdraw and stay his pending

habeas petition in order to exhaust his state court remedies. The Court granted

Respondent’s motion to dismiss and dismissed the petition with leave to amend. The

Court denied Petitioner’s motion to withdraw and stay the instant petition without

prejudice. The Court directed Petitioner to file an amended petition containing only

exhausted claims and renew his motion to stay the amended petition. Petitioner filed an

**E-filed 5/21/07**

Case 5:03-cv-01876-JF Document 32 Filed 05/21/07 Page 1 of 4
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

Order Denying Motion to Expedite Case; Directing Petitioner to File a Second Amended Petition 

P:\pro-se\sj.jf\hc.03\hudson876misc 2

amended petition, which was mistakenly opened as a new habeas action in case no. 

C 05-1486 JF (PR) on April 5, 2005. Thereafter, Petitioner notified the Court that his

state habeas petition was denied by the California Supreme Court. Accordingly, it

appears that Petitioner has now exhausted all of his claims. On May 7, 2007, Petitioner

filed a motion to expedite his case. The Court will DENY Petitioner’s motion (docket no.

30) without prejudice and direct Petitioner to file a second amended petition containing

all of his exhausted claims within thirty days of the date this order is filed, as set forth

below.

CONCLUSION 

1. Petitioner’s motion to expedite the case (docket no. 30) is DENIED without 

prejudice. 

2. Petitioner shall file a second amended petition containing his newly 

exhausted claims and his exhausted claims within thirty days of the date this order is

filed. Petitioner shall include the caption and civil case number used in this order 

(No. C 03-1876 JF (PR)) and the words “SECOND AMENDED PETITION” on the first

page of the Court’s habeas form, enclosed with this order. Petitioner may not incorporate

material from his earlier petitions by reference, therefore he must include all supporting

documentation, such as exhibits, with the second amended petition. Petitioner’s second

amended petition must include all of the exhausted claims he intends to raise in this

federal habeas action, including the exhausted claims in his amended petition and the

additional newly exhausted claims.

3. It is Petitioner’s responsibility to prosecute this case. Petitioner is 

reminded that all communications with the Court must be served on Respondent by

mailing a true copy of the document to Respondent’s counsel. Petitioner must keep the

Court and all parties informed of any change of address by filing a separate paper

captioned “Notice of Change of Address.” 

\\\

\\\

Case 5:03-cv-01876-JF Document 32 Filed 05/21/07 Page 2 of 4
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

Order Denying Motion to Expedite Case; Directing Petitioner to File a Second Amended Petition 

P:\pro-se\sj.jf\hc.03\hudson876misc 3

Petitioner must comply with the Court’s orders in a timely fashion. Failure to do so may

result in the dismissal of this action for failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of

Civil Procedure 41(b). 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED:______________ JEREMY FOGEL 

United States District Judge

5/18/07

Case 5:03-cv-01876-JF Document 32 Filed 05/21/07 Page 3 of 4
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

Order Denying Motion to Expedite Case; Directing Petitioner to File a Second Amended Petition 

P:\pro-se\sj.jf\hc.03\hudson876misc 4

A copy of this ruling was mailed to the following:

Marcus L. Hudson

T-50133

High Desert State Prison 

P.O. Box 3030

Susanville, CA 96127

Bruce Ortega

California Attorney General’s Office

455 Golden Gate Avenue,

Suite 11000

San Francisco CA 94102-7004

 

Case 5:03-cv-01876-JF Document 32 Filed 05/21/07 Page 4 of 4