Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05943/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05943-2/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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DALE LLOYD COTTRELL,

Petitioner,

v.

JEANNE WOODFORD, et al.,

Respondents.

 /

CV F 04-5943 SMS HC

ORDER GRANTING STAY AND ABEYANCE

[Docs. 36, 37]

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

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(1), the parties have consented to

the jurisdiction of the United States Magistrate Judge. 

Petitioner filed the instant petition for writ of habeas corpus on July 7, 2004. Respondent

filed an answer to the petition on June 14, 2005. 

Now pending before the Court is Petitioner’s November 1, 2005, motion to stay the

petition in abeyance pending exhaustion of new claims in the state court. On November 22,

2005, 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. 

Because Respondent has no opposition to staying the instant petition pending exhaustion

Case 1:04-cv-05943-SMS Document 39 Filed 12/02/05 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 1The filing should be titled: “Status Report.”

2

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 the date of service of this order of the status

of his habeas petition in the California Supreme Court.1 Further, Petitioner must file a new status

report every thirty (30) days thereafter 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 thirty (30) 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: November 30, 2005 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-05943-SMS Document 39 Filed 12/02/05 Page 2 of 2