Niederstadt v. Nixon
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
1Concurring in the judgmentColloton, Circuit Judge
I conclude that James Niederstadt’s due process claim was procedurally defaulted in the Missouri courts, and that he is barred from pursuing it in this federal habeas corpus proceeding. I therefore concur in the judgment reversing the decision of the district court.
Under Missouri law, a constitutional claim must be raised at the earliest opportunity, State v. Galazin, 58 S.W.3d 500, 505 (Mo.2001), and a state prisoner who fails to present his claim in accordance with state procedure is barred from raising the claim in a federal habeas corpus proceeding. Sweet v. Delo, 125 F.3d 1144, 1149-50…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Coleman v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Schlup v. DeloSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- Bousley v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
- Sawyer v. WhitleySupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Bouie v. City of ColumbiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.