May v. Maschner
District Court, W.D. Missouri
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER DIRECTING FURTHER PROCEEDINGS
JOHN W. OLIVER, Senior District Judge.
I
This is a State prisoner habeas corpus case. The response of the Attorney General to this Court’s order to show cause contends that petitioner’s pro se petition presents a mixed petition of exhausted and unexhausted claims which is subject to dismissal without prejudice under Rose v. Lundy, 455 U.S. 509, 102 S.Ct. 1198, 71 L.Ed.2d 379 (1982). We disagree. We find and conclude that petitioner has exhausted his federal Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 95 S.Ct. 2525, 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975), claim.…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Johnson v. ZerbstSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Faretta v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Rose v. LundySupreme Court of the United States · 1982
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.