(HC) Harms v. Silva
This text of (HC) Harms v. Silva ((HC) Harms v. Silva) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 GREGORY HARMS, No. 2:25-cv-1048 CSK P 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER 14 EDWARD SILVA, 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding through counsel, filed a petition for a writ of habeas 18 corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner paid the filing fee. 19 Petitioner states that he filed, with the petition, a motion to stay pursuant to Kelly v. 20 Small, 315 F.3d 1063 (9th Cir. 2003) to exhaust unexhausted claims.1 (ECF No. 1-2 at 12.) 21 However, the record does not contain a motion to stay pursuant to Kelly. This Court also 22 observes that a stay pursuant to Kelly includes amending the petition to delete any unexhausted 23 claims. Kelly, 315 F.3d at 1070. 24 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that within twenty-one days of the date of this 25 order, petitioner shall file the motion to stay referred to in the petition. 26 /// 27 1 Petitioner does not state that he will seek a motion to stay pursuant to Rhines v. Weber, 544 U.S. 28 269 (2005). 1 | Dated: April 14, 2025 ~ CHI S00 KIM 3 |) Harm1048.100fee/2 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
(HC) Harms v. Silva, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hc-harms-v-silva-caed-2025.