Warden

(HC) Tessmer v. Warden

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaAugust 7, 20242:24-cv-01500California1,248 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ROBERT HENRY TESSMER, JR., No. 2:24-cv-1500 CSK P Petitioner, v. ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE STEVE SMITH, Acting Warden, Respondent. 16 Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner challenges his 2022 murder conviction. On June 3, 2024, petitioner was directed to file, within thirty days, an amended petition raising only exhausted claims. Mor than thirty days have passed, and petitioner has not filed an amended petition or otherwise responded to the Court’s June 3, 2024 order. Petitioner is ordered to show cause why the unexhausted ineffective assistance of counsel claim should not be stricken, and this action proceed on the remaining three claims that petitioner has exhausted. In the alternative, petitioner may file a motion to stay this action while he returns to state court to exhaust the ineffective assistance of counsel claim. Background…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.