Arthur Calderon, Warden v. United States District Court for the Eastern District of California (Sacramento), Larry Roberts, Real Party in Interest
Arthur CALDERON, Warden, v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA (SACRAMENTO), Respondent, Larry Roberts, Real Party in Interest
Opinion
ORDER The order filed April 14, 1997 was not published. It should have been and it is now ordered published.
ORDER Arthur Calderon, Warden of the California State Prison at San Quentin, petitions for a writ of mandamus directed to the district court ordering it to vacate its grant of the discovery motions of Larry Roberts, the real party in interest. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1651 .
In light of the concession by petitioner that his federal habeas petition contains unexhausted claims that must be dismissed or pursued in state court before they may be included in the federal habeas petition, discovery at this time is inappropriate.
See Rose v. Lundy, 455 U.S. 509, 513-520 , 102 S.Ct. 1198, 1200-1204 , 71 L.Ed.2d 379 (1982);
Calderon v. United States Dist. Ct., 107 F.3d 756 (9th Cir.1997) (Gordon);
Calderon v. United States Dist. Ct., 98 F.3d 1102 (9th Cir.1996) (Nicolaus).
We GRANT the petition for writ of mandamus and remand to the district court with instructions to vacate its discovery order unless the real party in interest elects to amend his petition to include only exhausted claims or dismiss without prejudice his current petition for federal habeas corpus relief and file a new petition containing only exhausted claims.
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 4 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
(finding that district court’s grant of discovery was “inappropriate” when habeas 6 7 petition contained unexhausted claims)
-
(holding that discovery concerning unexhausted claims was inappropriate)
-
(“[as this] federal habeas petition contains unexhausted claims that must be dismissed or 10 pursued in state court before they may be included in the federal habeas petition, discovery at 11 this time is inappropriate”)
Cited by 12 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
- Sherman v. McDaniel
- (DP)(HC) Horning v. Broomfield
- 98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3624, 98 Daily Journal D.A.R. 4993 Arthur Calderon, Warden v. The United States District Court for the Northern District of California
- 97 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8064, 97 Daily Journal D.A.R. 13,025 E.K. McDaniel Warden of Ely State Prison, Frankie Sue Del Papa, Attorney General of the State of Nevada v. United States District Court for the District of Nevada, Daniel Steven Jones, Real Party in Interest
- McDaniel v. United States District Court
- Calderon v. United States District Court
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.