Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Canady v. Aiken, C18-1005-JCC-MAT. (2019)

Court: District Court, D. Washington Number: infdco20190514d85 Visitors: 6
Filed: May 13, 2019
Latest Update: May 13, 2019
Summary: ORDER LIFTING STAY AND DIRECTING RESPONDENT TO FILE ANSWER TO 2254 PETITION MARY ALICE THEILER , Magistrate Judge . This is a federal habeas action brought under 28 U.S.C. 2254. On October 17, 2018, this Court issued an Order granting petitioner's request to stay and hold in abeyance her federal habeas petition pending exhaustion in the state courts of her claims for federal habeas relief. (Dkt. 14.) On March 21, 2019, this Court issued an Order directing petitioner to show cause why the
More

ORDER LIFTING STAY AND DIRECTING RESPONDENT TO FILE ANSWER TO 2254 PETITION

This is a federal habeas action brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On October 17, 2018, this Court issued an Order granting petitioner's request to stay and hold in abeyance her federal habeas petition pending exhaustion in the state courts of her claims for federal habeas relief. (Dkt. 14.) On March 21, 2019, this Court issued an Order directing petitioner to show cause why the stay should not be lifted as it appeared her personal restraint proceedings had concluded in November 2018. (Dkt. 16.) Petitioner was advised that if she failed to timely respond to the Order to Show Cause, the stay would be lifted and a briefing schedule would be established. (Id.) Petitioner has not responded to the Order to Show Cause.

Accordingly, this Court ORDERS as follows:

(1) The stay in this matter is LIFTED.

(2) Not later than July 1, 2019, respondent shall file and serve an answer to petitioner's federal habeas petition in accordance with Rule 5 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in United States District Courts. As part of such answer, respondent shall state whether petitioner has exhausted available state remedies and whether an evidentiary hearing is necessary. Respondent shall not file a dispositive motion in place of an answer without first showing cause as to why an answer is inadequate. Respondent shall file the answer with the Clerk of the Court and serve a copy of the answer on petitioner.

The answer will be treated in accordance with LCR 7(d)(3). Accordingly, on the face of the answer, respondent shall note it for consideration on the fourth Friday after filing. Petitioner may file and serve a response not later than the Monday immediately preceding the Friday designated for consideration of the matter, and respondent may file and serve a reply not later than the Friday designated for consideration of the matter.

(3) The Clerk is directed to send copies of this Order to petitioner, to counsel for respondent, and to the Honorable John C. Coughenour.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer