Legal Opinion

Rose v. Lundy

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided March 8, 1982No. 80-846PublishedCited by 5,658 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice O’Connor

In this case we consider whether the exhaustion rule in 28 U. S. C. §§ 2254(b), (c) requires a federal district court to dismiss a petition for a writ of habeas corpus containing any claims that have not been exhausted in the state courts. Because a rule requiring exhaustion of all claims furthers the purposes underlying the habeas statute, we hold that a district court must dismiss such “mixed petitions,” leaving the prisoner with the choice of returning to state court to exhaust his claims or of amending or resubmitting the habeas petition to present only exhausted claims to the district…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Fay v. NoiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court of KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  3. Brown v. AllenSupreme Court of the United States · 1953
  4. Sanders v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  5. Whiteley v. Warden, Wyoming State PenitentiarySupreme Court of the United States · 1971

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

3Cited by5,658 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Slack v. McDanielSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  3. Williams v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  4. Heck v. HumphreySupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  5. Coleman v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1991

5,653 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