Unknown
(HC) Silva v. Unknown
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JOE SILVA, No. 2:24-cv-0618 DJC AC P Petitioner, v. NOTICE TO PRO SE HABEAS
PETITIONER REGARDING
UNKNOWN, EXHAUSTION Respondent. 16 Respondent has filed a motion to dismiss your petition on the ground that some of your claims are unexhausted. ECF No. 19. Federal law requires any habeas claim to be presented first to the state courts in order to correct any constitutional error. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b)(1)(A); see also Rose v. Lundy, 455 U.S. 509, 515-16 (1982) (explaining why federal habeas petitioners must exhaust claim by giving state courts the first opportunity to correct constitutional error); O’Sullivan v. Boerckel, 526 U.S. 838, 845 (1999) (explaining that exhaustion requires the completion of “one complete round” of state court review). If you have not yet presented all of your claims to the highest state court, you may request the federal court to place your federal habeas…