Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-03147/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-03147-1/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)

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CHAZARUS HILL, Sr.,

Petitioner,

 v.

MATTHEW CATE, Secretary,

Respondent.

 /

No. C-09-3147 TEH (PR)

ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER’S

MOTION TO STAY FEDERAL

PROCEEDINGS AND

ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSING CASE;

INSTRUCTIONS TO THE CLERK

(Doc. #11 & 12)

Petitioner, a state prisoner incarcerated at the Sierra

Conservation Center in Jamestown, California, has filed a pro se

Amended Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254

challenging a judgment of conviction from Alameda County Superior

Court. Doc. #7. Petitioner seeks federal habeas corpus relief by

alleging various claims, including there was insufficient evidence

to support his convictions, the trial court improperly removed a

juror during trial, and the state improperly calculated his time

credits. After the Court issued an Order to Show Cause, Respondent

filed a Motion to Dismiss the Amended Petition on the ground that

Petitioner failed to exhaust two claims contained in the Amended

Case 3:09-cv-03147-TEH Document 13 Filed 04/13/10 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

Petition. Doc. ## 8 & 11. After Respondent filed the Motion to

Dismiss, Petitioner filed a Motion to Stay the proceedings to allow

him to return to state court to exhaust his unexhausted claims. 

Doc. #12. 

Good cause shown, Petitioner’s request for a stay of these

proceedings so he can return to state court and exhaust all claims

(Doc. #12) is GRANTED. See Rhines v. Webber, 544 U.S. 269, 277

(2005) (stay appropriate where there was good cause for Petitioner’s

failure to exhaust his unexhausted claim in state court and the

claim is potentially meritorious). 

The Clerk is instructed to terminate the motions listed in

docket numbers 11 and 12 and TO CLOSE the case ADMINISTRATIVELY. 

Nothing further will take place in this matter until Petitioner

exhausts all claims set forth in the Amended Petition, and, within

thirty (30) days thereafter, moves to reopen the case, lift the

Court’s stay and amend the stayed Amended Petition to add the

newly-exhausted claims. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED 04/13/10 

THELTON E. HENDERSON

United States District Judge

G:\PRO-SE\TEH\HC.09\Hill-09-3147-stay-mtd.wpd

Case 3:09-cv-03147-TEH Document 13 Filed 04/13/10 Page 2 of 2