Legal Opinion
Fred Jay Jackson v. Ernest C. Roe, Warden
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided September 23, 2005No. 02-56210PublishedCited by 280 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BERZON, Circuit Judge.
Fred Jackson filed a “mixed” 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition. The district court refused to stay proceedings so that he could exhaust the unexhausted claim, which was at that time pending before the California Supreme Court. Rhines v. Weber, — U.S. - — -, 125 S.Ct. 1528, 161 L.Ed.2d 440 (2005), however, holds that a federal court must, in limited circumstances, stay a mixed petition to allow a petitioner to present an unexhaust-ed claim to a state court for review. Id. at 1535. Under Rhines, a district court’s decision to grant or deny a stay is reviewed…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Coleman v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Rose v. LundySupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Rhines v. WeberSupreme Court of the United States · 2005
- Mayle v. FelixSupreme Court of the United States · 2005
- Carey v. SaffoldSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by280 opinions
- Arthur Robbins, III v. Tom L. CareyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
- Lira v. HerreraCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
- King v. RyanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
- Alfonso Blake v. Renee BakerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
- Wooten v. KirklandCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
275 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.