Legal Opinion

Hageman v. Hill

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided March 2, 2009No. 08-35207PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM **

Carl Hageman appeals the district court’s denial of his petition for habeas corpus. Hageman concedes that he has procedurally defaulted on all claims he presented to the district court in his habe-as petition, but argues on appeal that he has established both cause and prejudice and actual innocence that would excuse his procedural default and allow him to obtain federal review of his substantive claims. We have jurisdiction to review his petition under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 and 2253, and we affirm.

1. Hageman first argues that he has demonstrated cause and prejudice that would excuse…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Coleman v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  2. Schlup v. DeloSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
  3. Murray v. CarrierSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  4. Bousley v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
  5. Herrera v. CollinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1993

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Roberts v. HowtonDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 2014
  2. Norris v. ThornellDistrict Court, D. Arizona · 2025

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

Powered by the Exa API