Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-00894/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-00894-4/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Evans
Respondent
Daniel Justin Ortega
Petitioner

Document Text:

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

DANIEL JUSTIN ORTEGA,

Petitioner,

v.

EVANS, Warden

Respondent.

 /

1:08-cv-00894 DLB HC

ORDER DISCHARGING ORDER TO SHOW

CAUSE AND DENYING MOTION FOR STAY

AND ABEYANCE, WITHOUT PREJUDICE

[Docs. 9, 10]

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

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 

Petitioner filed the instant petition for writ of habeas corpus on June 9, 2008, in the

United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, Sacramento Division. (Court

Doc. 1.) By order of June 25, 2008, the petition was transferred to this Court. (Court Doc. 4.) 

On July 14, 2008, the Court issued an order to show cause regarding exhaustion as it

appeared one of Petitioner’s two claims was not exhausted. (Court Doc. 7.) On August 22,

2008, Petitioner filed a motion to stay and hold the petition in abeyance pending exhaustion of

the unexhausted claim. (Court Doc. 9.) 

On September 3, 2008, without ruling on Petitioner’s motion to stay, the Court issued a

second order to show cause regarding exhaustion, as it was unclear whether Ground Two of the

petition was exhausted. (Court Doc. 10.) Petitioner filed a response on September 23, 2008. 

(Court Doc. 11.)

Case 1:08-cv-00894-LJO-DLB Document 12 Filed 10/14/08 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

 However, without the benefit of the entire state court record, the Court cannot make any ruling on whether 1

Petitioner has, in fact, adequately exhausted this claim to the state court. 

 In a separate order issued concurrently herewith, the Court is directed Respondent to submit a response to 2

the petition. 

2

Because it appears that Petitioner may have exhausted Ground Two of the instant

petition, the Court will discharge the order to show cause and deny the motion for stay and

abeyance, without prejudice. 

1,2

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The second order to show cause issued September 3, 2008, is DISCHARGED;

and,

2. Petitioner’s motion for stay and abeyance, is DENIED, without prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: October 13, 2008 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

3b142a UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:08-cv-00894-LJO-DLB Document 12 Filed 10/14/08 Page 2 of 2