Edward E. Allen v. State of Oregon

Good Law
990 F.2d 1255·1993 WL 74360·1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 14006
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 16, 199392-35439California342 words

Opinion

Opinion

990 F.2d 1255 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Edward E. ALLEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. STATE OF OREGON, Defendant-Appellee. No. 92-35439. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted March 10, 1993. * Decided March 16, 1993. Before WALLACE, Chief Judge, and FARRIS and BRUNETTI, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Edward E. Allen, a pro se prisoner, appeals from the district court's order construing his petition for writ of coram nobis as a petition for writ of habeas corpus and denying it for failure to exhaust state remedies. We affirm the district court. 3 Appellant filed an "Application for a Writ of Coram Nobis" in the district court, seeking to set aside his conviction in state court. The district court properly construed the application as a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. See Franklin v. State of Oregon, 662 F.2d 1337 , 1347 n. 13 (9th Cir.1981). 4 The district court properly denied habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.