Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01133/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01133-3/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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CHRISTOPHER DUANE BAKKEN,

Petitioner,

v.

A. K. SCRIBNER, et.al.,

Respondents.

 /

CV F 05-1133 OWW DLB HC

ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER’S

MOTION TO STAY PENDING EXHAUSTION

IN STATE COURT 

[Doc. 11]

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant

to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner is represented by Meredith Fahn, Esq. 

On February 22, 2006, Petitioner filed a motion to stay and hold the instant petition in

abeyance pending exhaustion in the state court. On February 27, 2006, Respondent filed a

statement of non-opposition to Petitioner’s request. 

In Rhines v. Weber, 125 S.Ct. 1528 (2005), the Supreme Court held that a district court

has discretion to stay a mixed petition to allow a petitioner to present his unexhausted claims to

the state court in the first instance and then to return to federal court for review of his perfected

petition. 

Based upon a showing of good cause and because Respondent has no opposition to

staying the instant petition pending exhaustion of the new claims, the Court will grant

Petitioner’s motion. However, the Court will not indefinitely hold the petition in abeyance. See

Taylor, 134 F.3d at 988 n.11. Petitioner must inform the Court no later than thirty (30) days after

Case 1:05-cv-01133-LJO -DLB Document 17 Filed 03/07/06 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 The filing should be titled: “Status Report.” 1

2

the date of service of this order of the status of his habeas petition filed in the Kings County

Superior Court. Further, Petitioner must file a new status report every thirty (30) days thereafter 1

as to the status of the state court proceedings. Following final action by the state courts,

Petitioner will be allowed thirty (30) days to file a motion for leave to amend the petition to

include the newly exhausted claims. Failure to comply with these instructions and time

allowances will result in this Court vacating the stay nunc pro tunc to the date of this order. 

Kelly, 315 F.3d at 1071.

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Petitioner’s motion to stay the petition and hold it in abeyance is GRANTED;

2. The instant petition is STAYED pending exhaustion of Petitioner’s state

remedies; 

3. Petitioner is DIRECTED to file a status report within thirty (30) days of the date

of service of this order;

4. Petitioner is DIRECTED to file a new status report every sixty (60) days after

filing his initial status report; and

5. Petitioner is GRANTED thirty (30) days time following the final order of the state

courts in which to advise this Court of the finality of the state proceedings and file

an amended petition. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: March 6, 2006 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

3b142a UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-01133-LJO -DLB Document 17 Filed 03/07/06 Page 2 of 2