Foulk

(HC) Riggins v. Foulk

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaOctober 13, 20202:15-cv-01718California1,376 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 JAMES RIGGINS, No. 2:15-cv-1718 AC P Petitioner, v. ORDER and FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

F. FOULK, Respondent. 15 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, has filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2245. For the reasons set forth below, the undersigned recommends that the court dismiss the action without prejudice for failure to prosecute. I. Background Petitioner filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. ECF No. 5. Petitioner challenged his conviction and sentence on five grounds, four of which had been exhausted in state court. ECF No. 5 at 5-13. In light of petitioner’s representation that Ground Five had not been presented to the California Supreme Court, and was therefore not exhausted, petitioner was ordered on January 20, 2016 to inform the court how he wished to proceed. ECF No. 10. Petitioner was…

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.