Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-05457/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-05457-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 540
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Mandamus and Other
Cause of Action: 28:1651 Petition for Writ of Mandamus

---

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

LACY MITCHELL, 

Petitioner,

 vs.

TERESA SCHWARTZ, Warden,

Respondent. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 07-5457 JSW (PR)

ORDER DISMISSING PETITION

FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS

AND DENYING MOTION TO

PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS:

NO FEE IS DUE

This is a petition for a writ of mandamus brought pro se by a state prisoner, filed

on October 25, 2007, apparently seeking to suspend proceedings to allow Petitioner to go

back to state court to request an evidentiary hearing. However, it appears that Petitioner

inadvertently filed this petition as a new case, because the proceeding that Petitioner

apparently seeks to suspend involves his habeas corpus petition, filed under Case No. C

06-3776 JSW (PR), and currently pending before this Court. In this mandamus petition,

Petitioner asserts that he wishes to pursue an evidentiary hearing on his ineffective

assistance of counsel claims in state court. This Court has examined the earlier filed

case, and the petition there includes the referenced ineffective assistance claims. 

Therefore, it appears that Petitioner is seeking to stay the earlier proceedings, so that he

may return to the state courts. Moreover, mandamus is not the proper vehicle to suspend

proceedings, as federal district courts are without power to issue mandamus to direct

state courts, state judicial officers, or other state officials in the performance of their

duties. A petition for a writ of mandamus to compel a state court or official to take or

Case 3:07-cv-05457-JSW Document 4 Filed 11/01/07 Page 1 of 3
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

refrain from some action is frivolous as a matter of law. See Demos v. U.S. District

Court, 925 F.2d 1160, 1161-62 (9th Cir. 1991) (imposing no filing in forma pauperis

order). Therefore, this Court finds that this petition was filed in error as a new action and

must be dismissed.

If Petitioner, indeed, seeks to stay the pending habeas petition in order to exhaust

his claims in state court, there is a procedure by which he may wish to pursue the relief

he is seeking. A district court may stay a petition pending a petitioner's exhaustion of

additional claims, with the intention of allowing an amendment after exhaustion to add

the newly exhausted claims. See Rhines v. Webber, 125 S. Ct. 1528, 1535 (2005); Kelly

v. Small, 315 F.3d 1063, 1070 (9th Cir. 2003); Calderon v. United States Dist. Court

(Taylor), 134 F.3d 981, 989 (9th Cir. 1998). However, under Rhines, a district court is

only authorized to hold a petition in abeyance in limited circumstances. In order to be

granted a stay and abeyance, a habeas petitioner must first establish: (1) good cause for

his failure to previously exhaust the claims; and (2) that the additional claims he seeks to

exhaust in state court are "potentially meritorious." See Rhines, 125 S. Ct. at 1535. If

Petitioner wishes to pursue a stay on his earlier-filed case, C 06-3776 JSW, he must file a

motion establishing that he is entitled to such a stay under the standard set forth in

Rhines. Petitioner must place the earlier case number, C 06-3776 JSW (PR), on any such

motion he wishes to file on that action and on all correspondence with the Court about it. 

Accordingly, the instant petition is DISMISSED as inadvertently filed. The Clerk

shall close the file and enter judgment in this matter. Petitioner’s motion seeking to

proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED (docket no. 2). Because the case was opened in

error, no fee is due. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: November 1, 2007

 JEFFREY S. WHITE

United States District Judge

Case 3:07-cv-05457-JSW Document 4 Filed 11/01/07 Page 2 of 3
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

LACY MITCHELL,

Plaintiff,

 v.

TERESA SCHWARTZ, et al,

Defendant. /

Case Number: CV07-05457 JSW 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District

Court, Northern District of California.

That on November 1, 2007, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing

said copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by

depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office

delivery receptacle located in the Clerk's office.

Lacy Mitchell

California Medical Facility

P.O. Box 2000

V08358

Vacaville, CA 95696

Dated: November 1, 2007

Richard W. Wieking, Clerk

By: Jennifer Ottolini, Deputy Clerk

Case 3:07-cv-05457-JSW Document 4 Filed 11/01/07 Page 3 of 3