Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Reginald Thomas Bunn, Jr v. Raul Lopez

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


October 17, 2011

REGINALD THOMAS BUNN, JR., PETITIONER,
v.
RAUL LOPEZ, RESPONDENT.

ORDER

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.

By way of background, petitioner commenced this action by filing a petition for writ of habeas corpus, together with a motion for a stay and abeyance. In his motion for stay and abeyance, petitioner acknowledged that two of the three grounds for federal habeas relief presented in his pending petition were unexhausted. Petitioner noted that he was awaiting a decision from the California Supreme Court on these unexhausted claims.

On September 9, 2011, the court issued an order explaining to petitioner that, according the California Supreme Court's website, his pursuit of habeas corpus relief in state court was now complete. Specifically, on August 24, 2011, that court denied his habeas petition in Case No. S191495. If such was the case, the court ordered petitioner to file an amended federal habeas petition containing all of his exhausted claims in this action and updating the allegations thereof to include reference to his exhaustion petition and the California Supreme Court's denial thereof.

In response to the court's order, petitioner has filed a motion for an extension of time to file an amended petition. Therein, he notes that he agrees with this court that his pursuit of habeas corpus relief in state court is now complete. However, he claims that he requires additional time to draft his amended federal petition. Good cause appearing, the court will deny petitioner's motion for a stay and abeyance as moot and grant petitioner's motion for an extension of time to file an amended petition.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Petitioner's motion for a stay and abeyance (Doc. No. 3) is denied as moot;

2. Petitioner's motion for an extension of time (Doc. No. 6) is granted; and

3. Within sixty days of the date of service of this order petitioner shall file an amended petition containing all of his exhausted claims in this action.

DAD:9 bunn1373.111amp

20111017

© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.