Daniel Ernest Soltero v. George Ingle Attorney General of California

990 F.2d 1260 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Daniel Ernest SOLTERO, Petitioner-Appellant, v. George INGLE; Attorney General of California, Respondents-Appellees. No. 92-55238. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted March 10, 1993. * Decided March 24, 1993. Before WALLACE, Chief Judge, and FARRIS and BRUNETTI, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Daniel Ernest Soltero, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition without prejudice for failure to exhaust state remedies. We review de novo, Norris v. Risley, 878 F.2d 1178, 1180 (9th Cir.1989), and we vacate and remand. 3 A state prisoner must exhaust all available state court remedies either on direct appeal or through collateral proceedings before a federal court may consider granting habeas corpus relief. 28 U.S.C. § 2254 ; Duckworth v. Serrano, 454 U.S. 1, 3 (1981) (per curiam). A petitioner satisfies the…