Rodriguez

Rodriguez v. Sherman

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJanuary 16, 20203:19-cv-00793California301 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 MICHAEL ELIJAH RODRIGUEZ, Case No. 19-cv-00793-JD Plaintiff, y. ORDER RE STAY Re: Dkt. No. 5 STUART SHERMAN, et al., g Defendants. Petitioner Michael Elijah Rodriguez filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus on || February 13, 2019, asserting six claims regarding his sentence in state court. Dkt. No. 1. On March 19, 2019, Rodriguez moved to stay his petition in order to properly exhaust five of the six 12 || claims, which had not been presented in his first state habeas corpus petition. Dkt. No. 5. The || State of California opposes the stay. Dkt. No. 14. A stay is granted to allow Rodriguez to exhaust 14 || the claims in his petition. Rodriguez has satisfied the requirements of Rhines v. Weber, 544 U.S. 269, 278 (2005). He has shown good cause for his failure to exhaust, namely, ineffective assistance of state post- conviction counsel. Dkt. No. 5 at 3; see also Blake v. Baker, 745 F.3d 977, 983…

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.