Bastidas v. Chappell

Petitioner moved to stay and abey his petition while he exhausted a claim that was not yet a part of his federal habeas petition. The court held that petitioner’s motion was likewise dispositive of that new unexhausted claim, such that the magistrate judge was without authority to “hear and determine” it, but rather was required to submit a report and recommendation to the district court. Further, the court rejected petitioner’s argument that the magistrate judge lacked authority to grant petitioner's request to remove two unexhausted claims from his petition. Accordingly, the court vacated the district court's dismissal of the habeas corpus petition and remanded for further proceedings. View "Bastidas v. Chappell" on Justia Law