Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_19-cv-01408/USCOURTS-cand-4_19-cv-01408-2/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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ALPACINO MCDANIELS,

Petitioner,

v.

JOSIE CASTELO,

Respondent.

Case No. 19-cv-01408-HSG 

ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION OF 

TIME TO FILE NOTICE OF 

ELECTION

Re: Dkt. No. 19

Petitioner has requested an extension of time to file a notice of election pursuant to the 

Court’s January 15, 2020 order, stating that he needs time to gather documents and conduct legal 

research. Dkt. No. 19. The Court GRANTS petitioner’s request for an extension of time to April 

27, 2020 to file his notice of election. 

However, the Court notes that the notice of election is relatively straightforward and 

should not require significant documentation or legal research. The notice need only state whether 

petitioner elects to: (1) dismiss the unexhausted claim (Claim No. 3) and go forward in this action 

with only the remaining claims (Claim Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8), or (2) dismiss this action and 

return to state court to exhaust all of his claims before returning to federal court to present all of 

his claims in a new petition, or (3) move for a stay of these proceedings while he exhausts his state 

court remedies for the unexhausted claim. If petitioner chooses Option (1) or Option (2), his filing 

need not be a long document; it is sufficient if he files a one-page document entitled “Election By 

Petitioner” and states simply: “Petitioner elects to proceed under Option ___.” Petitioner would 

have to insert a number in place of the blank space to indicate which of the first two options he 

chooses. If he chooses Option (3), petitioner must also file a motion for a stay in which he 

explains whether he is seeking a Rhines stay or a King/Kelly stay. If he seeks a Rhines stay, he 

Case 4:19-cv-01408-HSG Document 20 Filed 02/26/20 Page 1 of 2
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

must explain why he failed to exhaust his unexhausted claim in state court before presenting them 

to this court, and show that his claim is not meritless and that he is not intentionally delaying 

resolution of his constitutional claim. If he wants to file a motion under King/Kelly to amend his 

petition (to delete the unexhausted claim) and to stay this action while he exhausts state court 

remedies for the unexhausted claim, he must show that the amendment of any newly exhausted 

claims back into the petition would share a common core of operative facts and comply with 

AEDPA’s statute of limitations. 

If petitioner does not choose one of the three options or file a motion for a stay by April 

27, 2020, this action will proceed solely on the exhausted claims – Claim Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 

8.

This order terminates Dkt. No. 19. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 2/26/2020

______________________________________

HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 4:19-cv-01408-HSG Document 20 Filed 02/26/20 Page 2 of 2