Acrobat PDF

Tatum v. Wrzensinski et al - 6

You must be logged in to download this document
Reviews
Shared by: Tim Stanley
Stats
views:
28
rating:
not rated
reviews:
0
posted:
4/15/2008
language:
English
pages:
0
Tatum v. Wrzensinski et al Doc. 6 Case 3:07-cv-05168-RBL Document 6 Filed 04/09/2007 Page 1 of 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 The Court, having reviewed the § 2254 petition filed in this case, does hereby find and ORDER: (1) The Court will not order a response to the petition because the petition does not indicate v. STEVE MANSFIELD, Respondent. ROGER TATUM, Case No. C07-5168RBL Petitioner, ORDER REFUSING TO SERVE PETITION AND DIRECTING PETITIONER TO SHOW CAUSE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA that petitioner's grounds for federal relief have been properly exhausted in state court. Specifically, the petition does not show that his claims for federal relief have been presented to the Washington State Supreme Court. The exhaustion of state court remedies is a prerequisite to the granting of a petition for writ of habeas corpus. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b)(1). If exhaustion is to be waived, it must be waived explicitly by respondent. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b)(3). A waiver of exhaustion, thus, may not be implied or inferred. A petition can satisfy the exhaustion requirement by providing the highest state court with a full and fair opportunity to consider all claims before presenting them to the federal court. Picard v. Connor, 404 U.S. 270, 276 (1971); Middleton v. Cupp, 768 F.2d 1083, 1086 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 478 U.S. 1021 (1986). Full and fair presentation of claims to the state court requires “full factual development” of the claims in that forum. Kenney v. Tamayo-Reyes, 504 U.S. 1, 8 (1992). ORDER Page - 1 Dockets.Justia.com Case 3:07-cv-05168-RBL Document 6 Filed 04/09/2007 Page 2 of 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 (2) Petitioner is directed to show cause by April 30, 2007, why the petition should not be dismissed for lack of exhaustion. (3) The Clerk is directed to send copies of this Order and the General Order to petitioner. DATED this 9th day of April, 2007. _/s/ J. Kelley Arnold J. Kelley Arnold United States Magistrate ORDER Page - 2

Shared by: Tim Stanley
Other docs by Tim Stanley
Related docs
Tatum v. Wrzensinski et al - 4
Views: 38  |  Downloads: 0
Tatum v. Simpson et al - 84
Views: 41  |  Downloads: 0
Hazel Tatum Bowers Estate et al v. Ellis - 9
Views: 50  |  Downloads: 0
Art_Tatum
Views: 3  |  Downloads: 0
Sanders v. Mansfield et al - 3
Views: 13  |  Downloads: 0
Doyle v. McConagha et al - 65
Views: 20  |  Downloads: 0
THORNTON v. NASH et al - 9
Views: 50  |  Downloads: 0
Scott v. Shaw et al - 7
Views: 42  |  Downloads: 0
DEPIRRO v. JONES et al - 4
Views: 59  |  Downloads: 0
Montes v. Rodriguez et al - 3
Views: 23  |  Downloads: 0
Sanders v. Mansfield et al - 5
Views: 26  |  Downloads: 0
Amnesty et al v Blair Opinion and Order
Views: 18  |  Downloads: 1