Sanchez

Sanchez v. Martinez

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaSeptember 17, 20243:23-cv-01561California1,028 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

I. BACKGROUND

24 On August 23, 2023, Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a Petitioner 25 for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, alleging that denial of his good 26 time credit is an Equal Protection Clause violation, and a motion to proceed in forma 27 pauperis (“IFP”). (ECF Nos. 1, 2.) 28 On September 18, 2023, the Court issued an Order granting the IFP motion; notifying “Petitioner his Petition as currently drafted is subject to dismissal for failure to allege exhaustion of state court remedies”; and directing Petitioner to either demonstrate exhaustion, voluntarily dismiss the Petitioner, or file a motion to stay the federal proceedings. (ECF No. 3 at 4–6.) On September 25, 2023, Petitioner filed the Motion to Stay, requesting the Court stay the federal proceedings until the state remedies are exhausted. (ECF No. 4.) On October 30, 2023, Respondents filed a Statement of No Opposition to Motion to Stay. (ECF No. 6.) On November 9, 2023, the Court issued an Order requiring Petitioner to file a Reply and reiterating the Rhines factors. (ECF No. 7.) On November 22, 2023,…

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.