Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-04205/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-04205-0/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

STEPHEN R. CRUMP, 

Petitioner,

 vs.

ALAMEDA COUNTY SUPERIOR

COURT, et al.,

Respondent(s).

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 05-4205 CRB (PR)

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

(Docs # 2 & 3)

Petitioner, a state prisoner incarcerated at San Quentin State Prison, has filed a pro

se petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging his recent

conviction from the Superior Court of the State of California in and for the County of

Alameda. 

After the superior court entered judgment on August 5, 2005, petitioner filed a

notice of appeal in the California Court of Appeal and a petition for a writ of habeas

corpus in the Supreme Court of California. The supreme court promptly denied the

petition for a writ of habeas corpus, but petitioner’s direct appeal is still pending in the

court of appeal.

Petitioner must exhaust state judicial remedies as to all claims before turning to

the federal courts for habeas review. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b),(c). This requirement is not

satisfied if there is a pending post-conviction proceeding in state court. See Sherwood v.

Tomkins, 716 F.2d 632, 634 (9th Cir. 1983). A would-be federal habeas petitioner must
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

await the outcome of all pending state post-conviction proceedings before his state

remedies are exhausted. See id. Even if the federal constitutional question raised by the

petitioner cannot be resolved in the pending state proceeding, that proceeding may result

in the reversal of the petitioner's conviction on some other ground, thereby mooting the

federal question. See id. (citations omitted). Petitioner must wait until his pending direct

appeal is resolved and exhausted in the state courts before seeking habeas relief in federal

court. Contrary to petitioner’s suggestion, there are no extraordinary circumstances in

this matter compelling a different conclusion.

Accordingly, the instant petition is DISMISSED without prejudice to refiling a new

petition after all pending state post-conviction proceedings are completed.

The clerk shall close the file and terminate all pending motions (see, e.g., docs # 2

& 3) as moot. No fee is due.

SO ORDERED.

DATED: October 26, 2005 

CHARLES R. BREYER

United States District Judge