Kliewer v. Bennett

1 FILED IN THE 2 EASTERU N. S D. I SD TI RS IT CR TI C OT F C WO AU SR HT I NGTON Dec 16, 2024 4 SEAN F. MCAVOY, CLERK 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON EUGENE KLIEWER, No. 2:24-cv-00293-SAB 11 Petitioner, 12 v. ORDER DISMISSING HABEAS 13 CORPUS PETITION JASON BENNETT, 15 Respondent.

17 On November 6, 2024, Petitioner Eugene Kliewer was ordered to show cause why his pro se Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 should not be dismissed due to his failure to exhaust state court remedies and as a proper exercise of abstention under Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971). ECF No. 14. Petitioner is in custody pursuant to a judgment of a state court and is currently housed at the Stafford Creek Corrections Center.1 ECF No. 1 at 1.

23 Petitioner is proceeding in forma pauperis. Respondent has not been served.

26 1 As discussed in this Court’s Order to Show Cause, Petitioner is in custody pursuant to a judgment of a State court, and he is challenging the constitutionality of his detention. ECF No. 1 at 1–2, 6; ECF No. 1-1 at 1–2. Thus, his habeas petition must be brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. See ECF No. 14 at 3–4.

1 In the Order to Show Cause, the Court cautioned Petitioner that his failure to show cause why this action should not be dismissed for failure to exhaust state 3|| court remedies and as a proper exercise of abstention under the Younger doctrine would be construed as his consent to the dismissal of this action. ECF No. 14 at 7.

5|| Petitioner did not respond to the Order to Show Cause within thirty days as directed and has filed nothing further in this action.

Accordingly, for the reasons set forth in the Order to Show Cause, ECF No. at 2-7, IT IS ORDERED that the Petition, ECF No. 1, is DISMISSED 9)| without prejudice for failure to exhaust state court remedies and as a proper exercise of abstention under the Younger doctrine.

11 IT IS SO ORDERED. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter this Order, 12||enter judgment, forward copies to Petitioner, and CLOSE the file. The Court 13|| further certifies that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith, and there is no basis upon which to issue 15|| a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b).

16 DATED this 16th day of December 2024.

20 , 1 Seley Ec thar 22 Stanley A. Bastian 3 Chief United States District Judge ADTRAN RICAAITCCOTATO ITADT AC RANTS NETITTAN in