Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Sept. 29, 2021

MixonGivens v. People of California

Judge
Charles Breyer
Docket
3:21-cv-05520
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
2
HabeasCivil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In MixonGivens v. Montgomery, Judge Breyer dismissed the mixed habeas petition without prejudice because one claim was unexhausted and petitioner did not respond.

Who this affects

Dominic MixonGivens's federal petition was dismissed without prejudice, leaving him able to file a new petition containing only exhausted claims; the court also terminated pending motions as moot.

What happened

Dominic MixonGivens, a state prisoner, filed a petition challenging a Santa Clara County conviction. He raised claims about juror misconduct and insufficient evidence, but had completed the state-court process only for the insufficient-evidence claim.

The court had previously dismissed the mixed petition without prejudice and gave MixonGivens options: withdraw the unexhausted claim, dismiss the entire petition and return after exhausting all claims, or possibly seek a stay by showing good cause and potential merit. MixonGivens did not respond within 28 days or request more time.

The court dismissed the petition without prejudice to filing a new federal petition containing only exhausted claims, closed the case, and terminated pending motions as moot. Judge Charles R. Breyer issued the order.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
MixonGivens v. People of California · No. 3:21-cv-05520
Judge
Charles Breyer
Date
Sept. 29, 2021

Background

Dominic MixonGivens, identified in the caption as a state prisoner at Calipatria State Prison, filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 seeking federal review of a conviction from the Santa Clara County Superior Court. The petition raised two federal claims: juror misconduct and insufficient evidence. The opinion states that MixonGivens had exhausted state judicial remedies only for the insufficient-evidence claim.

Prior Order and Nonresponse

On August 19, 2021, the court dismissed the mixed petition without prejudice. A mixed petition contains both exhausted and unexhausted claims. The court gave MixonGivens the choice of withdrawing the unexhausted claim and proceeding only on the exhausted claim, or dismissing the entire petition and returning to federal court with a new petition after exhausting all claims. The court also said he might be able to seek a stay if he could show good cause for not exhausting the claim earlier and that the claim had potential merit.

The court ordered MixonGivens to respond within 28 days and warned that failing to respond would result in dismissal of the entire mixed petition without prejudice to filing a new federal petition containing only exhausted claims. Forty days passed without a response or a request for an extension.

Ruling

The court dismissed the mixed petition without prejudice to filing a new federal petition containing only exhausted claims. It also directed the clerk to close the file and terminate all pending motions as moot. Judge Charles R. Breyer signed the order on September 29, 2021.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.