Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_12-cv-00343/USCOURTS-caed-2_12-cv-00343-1/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SANSON O.C. FRAZIER, No. 2:12-CV-0343-LKK-CMK-P

Petitioner, 

vs. ORDER

M.D. BITER,

Respondent.

 /

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this petition for a writ of

habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 

Petitioner seeks a stay-and-abeyance order (Doc. 18) to allow the state court to

consider a claim already raised in the state court in light of Lafler v. Cooper, 132 S.Ct. 1376

(2012). According to petitioner, Lafler announced a new rule of constitutional law with respect

to the assistance counsel must give in connection with plea bargains. Petitioner is incorrect. In

Lafler, the Supreme Court did not announce any new rule but merely applied the existing wellestablished framework of Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984). In short, there is

nothing new for the state court to consider and, thus, a stay of these proceedings is not warranted. 

/ / /

1

Case 2:12-cv-00343-KJM-CMK Document 21 Filed 08/08/12 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

Petitioner also seeks an order (Doc. 19) directing respondent to serve upon him

the state court records lodged with the court at the time respondent filed his answer to the

petition. Petitioner cites Rule 5 of the Federal Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in support

of his argument. Nothing in that rule, however, requires respondent to serve petitioner with a

separate copy of state court records lodged with the court. Rather, the rule requires that all state

court records be furnished to the court. 

Finally, petitioner seeks an extension of time to file a traverse (Doc. 20). Good

cause appearing therefor, this request will be granted. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Petitioner’s motion to stay these proceedings (Doc. 18) is denied;

2. Petitioner’s motion for an order directing respondent to serve upon him

copies of documents lodged with the court (Doc. 19) is denied; 

3. Petitioner’s motion for an extension of time (Doc. 20) is granted; and

4. Petitioner may file a traverse within 30 days of the date of this order. 

DATED: August 8, 2012

______________________________________

CRAIG M. KELLISON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2

Case 2:12-cv-00343-KJM-CMK Document 21 Filed 08/08/12 Page 2 of 2