James Lee Hess v. Samuel Lewis

94 F.3d 651 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. James Lee HESS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Samuel LEWIS, Respondent-Appellee. No. 94-16944. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Aug. 12, 1996. * Decided Aug. 16, 1996. Before: BROWNING, SCHROEDER, and RYMER, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Arizona prisoner James Lee Hess appeals pro se the district court's dismissal without prejudice of his habeas corpus petition brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 . Hess contends that the district court erred by abstaining because of his ongoing criminal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 , 2253. We review de novo, Fort Belknap Indian Community v. Mazurek, 43 F.3d 428 , 431 (9th Cir.1994), cert. denied, 116 S.Ct. 49 (1995), and affirm. 3 Generally, the federal courts will not intervene in a pending criminal proceeding absent extraordinary circumstances where the danger of irreparable harm is both great and immediate. See…