(HC) Griffin v. Price ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 DEXTER LAWRENCE GRIFFIN, No. 1:21-cv-01516-DAD-BAK (EPG) (HC) 10 Petitioner, ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S MOTIONS 11 v. (ECF Nos. 20, 22, 23) 12 BRANDON PRICE, 13 Respondent. 14 15 Petitioner Dexter Lawrence Griffin, who is civilly committed to Coalinga State Hospital, 16 is proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On 17 December 7, 2021, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations to 18 dismiss the petition without prejudice for failure to exhaust state judicial remedies. (ECF No. 19 14). 20 Before the Court are Petitioner’s motions to compel discovery and requests for sanctions 21 and subpoenas. (ECF Nos. 20, 22, 23). Although discovery is available pursuant to Rule 6 of the 22 Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts (“Habeas Rules”), it is 23 only granted at the Court’s discretion, and upon a showing of good cause. Bracy v. Gramley, 520 24 U.S. 899, 904 (1997) (“A habeas petitioner . . . is not entitled to discovery as a matter of ordinary 25 course.”); McDaniel v. U.S. District Court (Jones), 127 F.3d 886, 888 (9th Cir. 1997); Jones v. 26 Wood, 114 F.3d 1002, 1009 (9th Cir. 1997); Habeas Rule 6(a). Good cause is shown “where 27 specific allegations before the court show reason to believe that the petitioner may, if the facts are fully developed, be able to demonstrate that he is . . . entitled to relief.” Bracy, 520 U.S. at 1 | 908-09 (citing Harris v. Nelson, 394 U.S. 287 (1969)). If good cause is shown, the extent and 2 | scope of discovery is within the Court’s discretion. See Habeas Rule 6(a). 3 In the instant case, there are findings and recommendations to dismiss the petition 4 | without prejudice for failure to exhaust state judicial remedies pending before the district judge. 5 | At this particular stage in the proceedings, Petitioner has not established that if the facts are fully 6 | developed, he may be able to demonstrate that he is entitled to relief. As good cause has not been 7 | shown, Petitioner’s motions to compel discovery, requests for subpoenas, and requests for 8 | sanctions based on alleged failures to make disclosures or to cooperate in discovery will be 9 | denied. 10 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner’s motions (ECF Nos. 20, 22, 23) 11 | are DENIED. 12 B IT IS SO ORDERED. 14} Dated: _ June 29, 2022 [Jee Fey — 15 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28