Holland v. City of Ridgecrest ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DERRICK HOLLAND, Case No. 1:22-cv-01578-JLT-CDB 12 Plaintiff, ORDER ON STIPULATION TO STAY ACTION UNTIL CRIMINAL ACTION 13 v. AGAINST PLAINTIFF IS RESOLVED 14 CITY OF RIDGECREST., et al. (Doc. 13) 15 Defendants. 16 17 On December 8, 2022, Plaintiff filed a complaint against Defendants alleging that Plaintiff 18 was arrested unlawfully based on a fraudulent search of his home on August 17, 2020. (Doc. 1). 19 Plaintiff filed an amended complaint on February 27, 2023. (Doc. 9). On March 20, 2023, 20 Defendants filed a motion to dismiss arguing Plaintiff’s claims are barred by Heck v. Humphrey. 21 (Doc. 11). 22 Pending before the Court is the parties’ stipulation for order, filed March 22, 2023, staying 23 this action until the criminal case against Plaintiff is resolved. (Doc. 13). Plaintiff represents he 24 intends to file a motion to vacate the criminal judgment pursuant to Cal. Penal Code 1473.6 in 25 People of the State of California v. Derrick Andre Holland, Kern County Superior Court Criminal 26 Case No. RF008484A. Id. at 2. 27 Accordingly, based on the parties’ representations, for good cause appearing and this 1 | Court’s authority to stay civil proceedings pending the outcome of a related criminal proceeding!, 2 | HEREBY ORDERED: 3 1. This action shall be stayed until July 28, 2023; and 4 2. The parties shall file a joint status report, on or before July 15, 2023, to update the Court 5 as to the status of the criminal proceedings, and whether the stay may expire on July 28, 6 2023, as scheduled or whether it must be extended. 7 | ITIS ORDERED. | Dated: _ March 23, 2023 | Word bo 9 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 ' Federal courts may stay civil proceedings pending the outcome of a related criminal 7 prosecution in “the interests of justice.” United States v. Kordel, 397 US. 1, 12, n. 27 (1970); see also Federal Savs. And Loan Ins. Corp. v. Molinaro, 889 F.2d 899 (9th Cir. 1989) (the 2g | implication of a criminal defendant’s Fifth Amendment rights, particularly where criminal proceedings are pending, argues in favor of a stay of separate but related civil proceedings).