Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_07-cv-00822/USCOURTS-casd-3_07-cv-00822-1/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)

---

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

K:\COMMON\Adler\HABEAS\OPEN\Lister\Order re Abandonment and Response.wpd, 6217 -1- 07cv0822

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ABNER HAYNES LISTER, Civil No. 07-0822 BEN (JMA)

Petitioner,

ORDER:

(1) CONFIRMING PETITIONER’S 

 ABANDONMENT OF GROUNDS 

 THREE AND FOUR OF THE 

 PETITION, AND

(2) REQUIRING RESPONSE (28 U.S.C. 

 § 2254)

vs.

I.D. CLAY, Warden, et al.,

Respondents.

On May 7, 2007, Petitioner filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus raising four

grounds for relief. [Doc. No. 1.] The Petition form indicated that Petitioner had not exhausted

available state remedies regarding Grounds Three and Four of the Petition. (Petition at 13-14.)

On May 8, 2007, the Court issued a Notice Regarding Possible Dismissal of Petition for Failure

to Exhaust State Court Remedies. [Doc. No. 3.] The Notice informed Petitioner hat he had filed

a Petition containing both exhausted and unexhausted claims and set out four options for

Petitioner with regard to the Petition and the claims contained therein. The Notice gave

Petitioner until June 29, 2007 to select an option and respond, and it gave Respondent until July

30, 2007 to file any reply.

//

Case 3:07-cv-00822-BEN-JMA Document 9 Filed 06/21/07 Page 1 of 4
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

K:\COMMON\Adler\HABEAS\OPEN\Lister\Order re Abandonment and Response.wpd, 6217 -2- 07cv0822

On May 30, 2007 (nunc pro tunc to May 25, 2007), Petitioner filed a paper and exhibits

beginning “[h]ere [are] copies of my opening and reply brief[s] to demonstrate that Ground Four

... was raised and exhausted in the state courts.” [Doc. No. 6.] The paper goes on to state:

If this Court determines that Ground Four: Ineffective Assistance of Counsel is an

unexhausted claim I the Petitioner wish[] to formally abandon Ground[s] Three

and Four as unexhausted claims and proceed with my exhausted ones.

(Id. at 1.) On June 13, 2007, Petitioner filed a Notice Regarding Request to Amend Petition. 

[Doc. No. 8.] The “Notice” appears to consist entirely of copies of pages from the petition for

review filed on Petitioner’s behalf in the California Supreme Court and containing the substance

of Grounds One and Two of his federal Petition. (Id.) The Notice does indicate that Grounds

Three and Four of the Petition are unexhausted. 

The Court now construes Petitioner’s filings in response to the Court’s May 8, 2007

Order collectively as a formal abandonment of the unexhausted claims raised in the Petition

(Grounds Three and Four). The Court therefore finds that Petitioner has now abandoned

Grounds Three and Four of the original Petition and that the Petition consists ONLY of

Grounds One and Two.

Further, and in accordance with Rule 4 of the rules governing petitions for a writ of

habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, IT IS ORDERED that:

a. The Clerk of this Court shall promptly (1) serve a copy of the Petition and a copy of

this Order on the Attorney General for the State of California, or his authorized agent; and

(2) serve a copy of this Order on Petitioner.

b. If Respondent contends the Petition can be decided without the Court’s reaching the

merits of Petitioner’s claims other than because Petitioner has failed to exhaust state remedies

(e.g., because Respondent contends that the Petition is barred by the statute of limitations, or that

the Petition is subject to dismissal under Rule 9 of the Rules Governing § 2254 Cases, or that

all of the claims are procedurally defaulted, or that Petitioner is not in custody), Respondent shall

file a motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing § 2254 Cases no later than

August 31, 2007. The motion to dismiss shall not address the merits of Petitioner’s claims, but

rather shall address all grounds upon which Respondent contends dismissal without reaching the

Case 3:07-cv-00822-BEN-JMA Document 9 Filed 06/21/07 Page 2 of 4
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

K:\COMMON\Adler\HABEAS\OPEN\Lister\Order re Abandonment and Response.wpd, 6217 -3- 07cv0822

merits of Petitioner’s claims is warranted. At the time the motion to dismiss is filed, Respondent

shall lodge with the Court all records bearing on Respondent’s contention in this

regard. A hearing date is not required for the motion to dismiss.

c. If Respondent files a motion to dismiss, Petitioner shall file his opposition, if any, to

the motion no later than October 1, 2007. At the time the opposition is filed, Petitioner shall

lodge with the Court any records not lodged by Respondent which Petitioner believes may be

relevant to the Court’s determination of the motion.

d. Unless the Court orders otherwise, Respondent shall not file a reply to Petitioner’s

opposition to a motion to dismiss. If the motion is denied, the Court will afford Respondent

adequate time to respond to Petitioner’s claims on the merits.

e. If Respondent does not contend that the Petition can be decided without the Court

reaching the merits of Petitioner’s claims, Respondent shall file and serve an answer to the

Petition, and a memorandum of points and authorities in support of such answer, pursuant to

Rule 5 of the Rules Governing § 2254 Cases no later than September 28, 2007. At the time the

answer is filed, Respondent shall lodge with the Court all records bearing on the merits of

Petitioner’s claims. The lodgments shall be accompanied by a notice of lodgment which shall

be captioned “Notice of Lodgment in 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Habeas Corpus Case — To Be Sent

to Clerk’s Office.” Respondent shall not combine separate pleadings, orders or other items into

a combined lodgment entry. Each item shall be numbered separately and sequentially.

f. Petitioner may file a traverse to matters raised in the answer no later than October 29,

2007. Any traverse by Petitioner (a) shall state whether Petitioner admits or denies each

allegation of fact contained in the answer; (b) shall be limited to facts or arguments responsive

to matters raised in the answer; and (c) shall not raise new grounds for relief that were not

asserted in the Petition. Grounds for relief withheld until the traverse will not be considered.

No traverse shall exceed ten (10) pages in length absent advance leave of Court for good cause

shown.

g. A request by a party for an extension of time within which to file any of the pleadings

required by this Order should be made in advance of the due date of the pleading, and the Court

Case 3:07-cv-00822-BEN-JMA Document 9 Filed 06/21/07 Page 3 of 4
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

K:\COMMON\Adler\HABEAS\OPEN\Lister\Order re Abandonment and Response.wpd, 6217 -4- 07cv0822

will grant such a request only upon a showing of good cause. Any such request shall be

accompanied by a declaration under penalty of perjury explaining why an extension of time is

necessary.

h. Unless otherwise ordered by the Court, this case shall be deemed submitted on the day

following the date Petitioner’s opposition to a motion to dismiss and/or his traverse is due.

i. Every document delivered to the Court must include a certificate of service attesting

that a copy of such document was served on opposing counsel (or on the opposing party, if such

party is not represented by counsel). Any document delivered to the Court without a certificate

of service will be returned to the submitting party and will be disregarded by the Court.

j. Petitioner shall immediately notify the Court and counsel for Respondent of any change

of Petitioner’s address. If Petitioner fails to keep the Court informed of where Petitioner may

be contacted, this action will be subject to dismissal for failure to prosecute.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: June 21, 2007

Jan M. Adler

U.S. Magistrate Judge

Case 3:07-cv-00822-BEN-JMA Document 9 Filed 06/21/07 Page 4 of 4