Legal Opinion

Alfonso Blake v. Renee Baker

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided March 14, 2014No. 12-15522PublishedCited by 280 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

TASHIMA, Circuit Judge:

Alfonso Manuel Blake, a state prisoner, filed a habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 based on, inter alia, alleged ineffective assistance of trial counsel (“IAC”). Because this claim was not exhausted, Blake moved for a stay and abeyance under Rhines v. Weber, 544 U.S. 269, 125 S.Ct. 1528, 161 L.Ed.2d 440 (2005), so that he could return to state court and exhaust this claim. The district court denied the motion. We must decide whether Blake’s explanation for failure to exhaust this claim met the “good cause” requirement of Rhines. Because we answer that…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Coleman v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  3. Rose v. LundySupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  4. Pace v. DiGuglielmoSupreme Court of the United States · 2005
  5. Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1990

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

3Cited by280 opinions

  1. Terry Dixon v. Renee BakerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2017
  2. Agofsky v. JonesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2014
  3. Sammie Stokes v. Bryan StirlingCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2021
  4. Sammie Stokes v. Bryan StirlingCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2023
  5. Gregory Bolin v. Renee BakerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2021

275 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