Marshall

MEMORANDUM **

California state prisoner Robert Washington appeals pro se the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition challenging his nolo contendré first-degree murder with special circumstances conviction. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (a). We review de novo the district court’s decision to deny a habeas petition, Wade v. Terhune, 202 F.3d 1190, 1194 (9th Cir.2000), and we reverse and remand.

*651 Washington contends that the district court erred by finding that Claim 4 of his petition was unexhausted and consequently dismissing the petition as a “mixed petition” under Rose v. Lundy, 455 U.S. 509, 522 , 102 S.Ct. 1198 , 71 L.Ed.2d 379 (1982). We agree.

Contrary to the district court’s apparent interpretation, Washington did not contend in his first California Supreme Court habe-as petition that it was the offer of a choice between life without the possibility of parole instead of the possibility of the death penalty that, in and of itself, coerced him into pleading no contest. See Brady v. United States, 397 U.S. 742, 751 , 90 S.Ct. 1463 , 25 L.Ed.2d 747 (1970) (‘We decline to hold, however, that a guilty plea is compelled and…