Heilman v. Koenig
- Yvonne Rogers
- 4:19-cv-02607
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Heilman v. Koenig, Judge Rogers granted withdrawal, dismissed the habeas petition without prejudice, and terminated pending motions as moot.
Thomas John Heilman’s federal petition was dismissed without prejudice; C. Koenig’s motion to dismiss and Heilman’s motion for appointment of counsel were terminated as moot.
What happened
Thomas John Heilman, a state prisoner representing himself, filed a federal petition challenging his custody. In Heilman v. Koenig, the respondent argued that Heilman had not first presented all his claims to the California Supreme Court.
Instead of opposing dismissal, Heilman asked to withdraw the petition without prejudice so he could pursue his claims in state court. He said he expected to return to federal court after exhausting those state remedies.
Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers granted Heilman’s requests to withdraw and voluntarily dismiss the case without prejudice. The court terminated the pending motions as moot, including the respondent’s dismissal motion and Heilman’s request for appointed counsel, and closed the file.
The detailed version
- Heilman v. Koenig · No. 4:19-cv-02607
- Yvonne Rogers
- Oct. 11, 2019
Background
Thomas John Heilman, a state prisoner proceeding without a lawyer, filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging his custody. The court ordered C. Koenig, the warden and respondent, to respond. Koenig then moved to dismiss, arguing that Heilman had not exhausted available state judicial remedies before filing in federal court.
Rather than oppose the dismissal motion, Heilman asked to withdraw his petition without prejudice. He said he wanted to provide documentation to the California Supreme Court so that court could rule on the merits of his claims before he continued in federal court. Heilman also stated that he anticipated returning to federal court after exhausting his state remedies.
Court’s reasoning
The court explained that a state prisoner generally must first give the highest available state court a fair opportunity to decide each claim before seeking federal review. If the claims have not been exhausted, the federal petition must be dismissed. The court further explained that dismissal on that basis must be without prejudice so the petitioner may return after presenting the claims to the state’s highest court.
Because Koenig’s exhaustion argument, if correct, required dismissal, and because Heilman requested withdrawal and voluntary dismissal, the court found good cause to grant those requests. The court did not decide the merits of Heilman’s claims or express an opinion about whether a later federal petition would be timely.
Disposition
The court GRANTED Heilman’s requests to withdraw the petition and voluntarily dismiss the action. The petition was DISMISSED without prejudice. The court terminated as moot all remaining pending motions, including Heilman’s motion for appointment of counsel and Koenig’s motion to dismiss, and directed the clerk to close the file.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.