Robertson
(HC) Cleveland v. Robertson
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 PIERRE CLEVELAND, No. 2:20-cv-0674 WBS KJN P Petitioner, v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
JAMES ROBERTSON,1 Respondent. 16 Petitioner is a state prisoner, proceeding pro se, with an application for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Respondent filed a motion to dismiss this action because it was filed beyond the one-year statute of limitations (28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)), and it contains an unexhausted claim (28 U.S.C. § 2254(b)). Petitioner did not timely oppose the motion. On December 2, 2020, petitioner was ordered to show cause why his failure to oppose the motion should not be deemed a waiver of any opposition to granting the motion, and ordered to file an opposition. Petitioner filed a response, and was granted an additional thirty days in which to file his opposition. Thirty days have now passed, and petitioner has not filed an opposition or otherwise responded. As discussed below, the…