Baughman

(HC) Arismendez v. Baughman

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJanuary 13, 20202:17-cv-00792California2,868 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9 10 ROLANDO ARISMENDEZ, No. 2:17-cv-00792-MCE-CKD P 11 Petitioner, 12 v. ORDER AND

DAVID BAUGHMAN, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

14 Respondent.

16 Petitioner is a California state prisoner proceeding pro se in this federal habeas corpus action filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On March 4, 2019, petitioner filed a motion to stay this federal habeas action as well as a motion for an extension of time to file a first amended habeas petition. ECF Nos. 22-23. Respondent filed an opposition to the motion for a stay on March 27, 2019. ECF No. 24. On April 28, 2019, petitioner filed a reply to the opposition. ECF No. 25. Several days later, petitioner filed a first amended § 2254 petition along with a second motion to stay and abey these proceedings in order to exhaust additional claims in state court. For the reasons explained in greater detail below, the undersigned recommends that petitioner’s motion for a stay be granted in part and denied in part. ///// 27 1 All filing dates are…

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.