Legal Opinion

Arthur Robbins, III v. Tom L. Carey

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided March 12, 2007No. 05-17131PublishedCited by 1,735 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THOMAS, Circuit Judge.

In this appeal, we consider whether, in the absence of a request from an unrepresented petitioner, a district court is required to consider, sua sponte, the option of staying and abeying a petition for a writ of habeas corpus when the petitioner has filed a “mixed” petition consisting of both exhausted and unexhausted claims. We hold that such a requirement would conflict with Pliler v. Ford, 542 U.S. 225, 124 S.Ct. 2441, 159 L.Ed.2d 338 (2004), and Rhines v. Weber, 544 U.S. 269, 125 S.Ct. 1528, 161 L.Ed.2d 440 (2005), and we affirm the judgment of the district court.

I

On…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Gilbert B. Martinez v. Eddie Ylst, Superintendent, California Medical Facility SouthCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1991
  2. Rose v. LundySupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  3. Rhines v. WeberSupreme Court of the United States · 2005
  4. Turner v. DuncanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
  5. People v. WendeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979

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

3Cited by1,735 opinions

  1. King v. RyanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
  2. Miranda v. AnchondoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
  3. Wooten v. KirklandCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
  4. Davis v. SilvaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
  5. Pablo Bastidas v. Kevin ChappellCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2015

1,730 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