Coneal

Coneal v. Smith

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaFebruary 4, 20223:21-cv-03421California1,289 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 JERRY CONEAL, Case No. 21-cv-03421-WHO

Petitioner, ORDER DIRECTING PETITIONER

TO FILE A RESPONSE TO THIS

v. ORDER BY MARCH 21, 2022;

LAURIE SMITH, INSTRUCTIONS TO CLERK Respondent. Dkt. No.

12 INTRODUCTION Petitioner Jerry Coneal seeks federal habeas relief from his state convictions. However, one of his claims for habeas relief is unexhausted, as pointed out in respondent’s unopposed motion to dismiss. Because an unexhausted claim cannot proceed, Coneal must decide whether to dismiss his habeas action, dismiss the claim, or stay the suit so that he can exhaust his claim in state court. On or before March 21, 2022, Coneal must file a written response to this Order in which he makes clear what his decision is. Failure to file a proper response by March 21, 2022, may result in the dismissal of this action for failure to prosecute. 22 …

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.