Alfonso Penaflor v. Stu Sherman et al
| Alfonso Penaflor |
| Stu Sherman and The Attorney General of the State of California |
| 5:2015cv01339 |
| July 6, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Dale S. Fischer |
| Jean P. Rosenbluth |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
26
JUDGMENT by Judge Dale S. Fischer, Related to: R&R - Accepting Report and Recommendations, 25 . Pursuant to the Order Accepting Findings and Recommendations of U.S. Magistrate Judge, IT IS HEREBY ADJUDGED that this action is dismissed with prejudice. (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (bem)
|
|
Filing
4
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Magistrate Judge Jean P. Rosenbluth. IT THEREFORE IS ORDERED that within 21 days of the date of this Order, Petitioner do one of the following: (1) file a formal stay-and-abey motion if he believes he can make the required sh owings under Rhines; (2) voluntarily dismiss the Petition without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1), with the understanding that any later petition may be time barred under § 2244(d)(1); (3) voluntarily dismiss grounds two , three, and four of the Petition and elect either to proceed on the exhausted claim, ground one, or seek a stay of the then fully exhausted Petition under Kelly v. Small, 315 F.3d 1063 (9th Cir. 2003) (as amended) (allowing for stays of fully exhaus ted federal petitions without showing of good cause), overruling on other grounds recognized by Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1149 (9th Cir. 2007), with the understanding that he will be allowed to amend any newly exhausted claims back into the Pe tition only if the claims are timely or "relate back" to the original claim, see Mayle v. Felix, 545 U.S. 644, 664 (2005); or (4) show cause in writing why this action should not be dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust state remedies. (See Order for details) (bem)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
