Eldridge

(HC) Forbes v. Eldridge

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaFebruary 5, 20212:16-cv-01884California1,160 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 HOWARD FORBES, No. 2:16-cv-01884 MCE GGH P Petitioner, v. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS L. ELDRIGDE, Respondent. 16 Pending before the court is petitioner’s motion to stay proceedings pursuant to Rhines v. Weber, 544 U.S. 269 (2005). ECF No. 51. Petitioner seeks to exhaust his state court remedies on a claim alleging due process violation based on his denied right to testify at trial. Id. Respondent has filed an opposition. ECF No. 52. Petitioner has filed a reply. ECF No. 55. A district court may properly stay a habeas petition and hold it in abeyance pursuant to Rhines v. Weber, 544 U.S. 269 (2005). See King v. Ryan, 564 F.3d 1133, 1135 (9th Cir. 2009). Under Rhines, a district court may stay a mixed petition to allow a petitioner to present an unexhausted claim to the state courts. Rhines, 544 U.S. at 277. Assuming the petition itself has been timely filed, such a stay “eliminates entirely any limitations issue with…

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.