Legal Opinion

(HC) Sisounthone v. Neuschmid

District Court, E.D. California

Decided November 8, 2022No. 2:18-cv-03181Unknown

1Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 VANNA SISOUNTHONE, No. 2:18-cv-3181 DAD AC P 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER 14 ROBERT NEUSCHMID, WARDEN, 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, seeks a writ of habeas 18 corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. ECF No. 1. The matter was referred to a United States 19 Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 Respondent has moved for dismissal on grounds of non-exhaustion. ECF No. 10. The 21 motion is fully briefed. ECF Nos.…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Jones v. BockSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  2. Rose v. LundySupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  3. Cullen v. PinholsterSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
  4. Picard v. ConnorSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  5. Rhines v. WeberSupreme Court of the United States · 2005

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API