Withers v. Dupnik

990 F.2d 1266 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Charles Richard WITHERS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Clarence DUPNIK, Sheriff; Robert K. Corbin, Attorney General of the State of Arizona; David Ramage-White, Assistant Attorney General, Respondents-Appellees. No. 90-15851. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted March 23, 1993. * Decided April 2, 1993. Before WALLACE, Chief Judge, and FARRIS and BRUNETTI, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Charles Withers, an Arizona state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253 . We review de novo, Thomas v. Lewis, 945 F.2d 1119, 1122 (9th Cir.1991), and affirm. 3 A state prisoner must exhaust all available state court remedies before a federal court may consider granting habeas corpus relief. 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (b); Duckworth v. Serrano, 454 U.S. 1, 3 (1981) (per curiam). The petitioner has the…