Opinion

(HC) Brown v. Warden of U.S.P. Atwater

Court
District Court, E.D. California
Filed
Oct 23, 2020
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 17.5%

The opinion

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

11 JABORIE BROWN, Case No. 1:20-cv-00233-SAB-HC

12 Petitioner, ORDER GRANTING RESPONDENT’S

MOTION TO STAY

13 v.

(ECF No. 12)

14 WARDEN OF U.S.P. ATWATER,

15 Respondent.

16

17 Petitioner is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus

18 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241.

19 On September 10, 2020, Respondent moved to stay the instant proceeding pending

20 adjudication of Petitioner’s § 2255 motion, which is currently pending in the United States

21 District Court for the Southern District of Florida. (ECF No. 12). To date, Petitioner has not filed

22 any opposition or statement of non-opposition to the motion to stay, and the time for doing so

23 has passed.

24 Both the 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition before this Court and the 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion

25 before the sentencing court filed by Petitioner raise similar claims based upon United States v.

26 Davis, 139 S. Ct. 2319 (2019). (ECF No. 1; Ex. 2, ECF No. 13). Moreover, the § 2255 motion

27 filed in the sentencing court predates the § 2241 petition before this Court. Given that the

Southern District of Florida’s resolution of the § 2255 motion may provide clarity to the

1 | jurisdictional issue presented in this case and may even be fully determinative of the outcome,

2 | the Court finds that the objective of judicial efficiency is served by staying the instant proceeding

3 | pending resolution of Petitioner’s § 2255 motion in the Southern District of Florida.!

4 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

5 1. Respondent’s motion to stay (ECF No. 12) is GRANTED; and

6 2. Respondent shall file a status report regarding the § 2255 matter and any appeal on or

7 before December 22, 2020.

8

9 IT IS SO ORDERED. OF a Se

10 | Dated: _October 22, 2020 _ ef

4 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27 |

' The Court notes, however, that such a stay should not be indefinite, and the Court may revisit the stay in the event

28 | that resolution of the § 2255 motion is unduly prolonged.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.