IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
December 10, 2008
DANA L. SINGER, PETITIONER,
BOARD OF PRISON TERMS, ET AL., RESPONDENTS.
Petitioner is a state prison inmate proceeding pro se with a petition for a writ of habeas corpus challenging his April 26, 2006 denial of parole. Respondent has filed a motion to stay the proceedings pending the en banc decision in Hayward v. Marshall. Petitioner has opposed the motion, arguing that recent California Supreme Court authority provides guidance regarding the necessary examination of the state's parole process.
In Hayward v. Marshall, 512 F.3d 536 (9th Cir. 2008), the Ninth Circuit considered the much-litigated subject of parole in California and found that the Governor's determination to reverse a grant of parole was not based on evidence of the habeas petitioner's current threat to public safety. On May 16, 2008, the court granted a rehearing en banc. Hayward v. Marshall, 527 F.3d. 797 (9th Cir. 2008) Among the questions the appellate court is considering is the application of two California Supreme Court cases, In re Lawrence, 44 Cal.4th 1181 (2008) and In re Shaputis, 44 Cal.4th 1241 (2008); whether California's regulations have created a liberty interest in parole; and, if so, what process is due.
As respondent observes, a district court has the authority to stay a case pending resolution of other proceedings when the stay would promote efficiency. Leyva v. Certified Grocers of Cal., 593 F.3d 857, 863 (9th Cir. 1979). However, the Ninth Circuit has cautioned against indefinite stays in habeas cases. Yong v. INS, 208 F.3d 1116, 1119 (9th Cir. 2000). Moreover, while Hayward might clarify certain questions relevant to the determination of parole habeas, other Ninth Circuit authority as well as state decisions provide sufficient guidance for this court's resolution of the issues raised in the instant petition.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that respondent's motion requesting a stay is denied.
© 1992-2008 VersusLaw Inc.