United States District Court, Northern District of California
April 30, 2003
DANIEL J. DAMRON, PETITIONER, VS. GAIL LEWIS, WARDEN, RESPONDENT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: William Alsup, United States District Judge
ORDER REGARDING STAY
This is a habeas case filed pro se by a state prisoner. The court granted petitioner's request for a stay so he could exhaust an unexhausted issue. The case was stayed for ninety days, and the stay was later extended upon petitioner's report that he was proceeding in state court but had not yet completed exhaustion. Petitioner has written to the Court suggesting that rather than having a series of extensions while he awaits a ruling from the California Supreme Court, the Court make the stay indefinite and order petitioner to report when exhaustion is completed. This is modeled on a procedure discussed with apparent approval in Kelly v. Small, 315 F.3d 1063, 1071 (9th Cir. 2003).
Petitioner's suggestion is well taken. This case remains STAYED. Petitioner shall report within thirty days of completion of exhaustion. If he is unsuccessful in state court, he may ask that the stay be lifted and that the case proceed.
This case will be administratively closed while the stay remains in effect. This is a purely statistical matter which has no legal effect. The clerk shall close the file.
IT IS SO ORDERED
© 1992-2003 VersusLaw Inc.