RIOS v. SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

Case No. 6:16-v-430-Orl-37KRS.

DENNIS JUNIOR RIOS, Petitioner, v. SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, et al., Respondents.

United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Orlando Division.

Editors Note
Applicable Law: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Cause: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Nature of Suit: 530 Habeas Corpus (General)
Source: PACER


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Dennis Junior Rios, Petitioner, Pro Se.

Secretary, Department of Corrections, Respondent, represented by Carmen F. Corrente , Office of the Attorney General.

Attorney General, State of Florida, Respondent, represented by Carmen F. Corrente , Office of the Attorney General.


ORDER

ROY B. DALTON, Jr., District Judge.

This cause is before the Court on Petitioner's Motion to Stay (Doc. 10). Respondents oppose the motion (Doc. 13). The Supreme Court of the United States has set forth the law explaining when a district court should grant a motion to stay a petition for writ of habeas corpus brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254:

[I]t likely would be an abuse of discretion for a district court to deny a stay and to dismiss a mixed petition if the petitioner had good cause for his failure to exhaust, his unexhausted claims are potentially meritorious, and there is no indication that the petitioner engaged in intentionally dilatory litigation tactics. In such circumstances, the district court should stay, rather than dismiss, the mixed petition.

Rhines v. Weber, 544 U.S. 269, 277-78 (2005).

Petitioner seeks a stay of the instant proceedings because he is attempting to exhaust one ground of his habeas petition (Doc. 10- at 2-3) The Court concludes that Petitioner has provided good cause for staying these proceedings. See Rhines, 544 U.S. at 277-78.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:

1. Petitioner's Motion to Stay (Doc. 10) is GRANTED. This case is STAYED pending conclusion of Petitioner's state court proceedings.

2. Petitioner shall file a motion to reopen this case within THIRTY (30) DAYS after a final decision has been rendered in the state court.

3. Petitioner's Motion for Extension of Time (Doc. 9) is DENIED without prejudice.

4. The Clerk of Court is directed to administratively close the case.

5. Petitioner is advised that the failure to comply with the requirements of this Order may result in dismissal of this case without further notice.

DONE AND ORDERED.


Comment

1000 Characters Remaining

Leagle.com reserves the right to edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions.

User Comments

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases