Kou Lo Vang v. State of Nevada

Good Law
2003 Daily Journal DAR 5555·329 F.3d 1069·2003 WL 21205373·2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4334·2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 10357
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 23, 200300-16639California3,160 words

Opinion

Opinion

Graber, J.

Petitioner Kou Lo Vang appeals the dismissal without prejudice of his petition for habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 . The district court dismissed the petition without prejudice because it was a “mixed petition” containing both exhausted and unexhausted claims. Petitioner argues that the court erred when it concluded that claims 1, 4, 5, 6, and 7 were procedurally defaulted and that claims 8 and 18(F)(1) and (2) were unexhausted. We agree with the district court that claims 1 and 7 were procedurally defaulted and that certain disputed claims were unexhausted. We hold, however, that claims 4, 5, and 6 were not procedurally defaulted.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

A Nevada jury convicted Petitioner of first-degree murder, first-degree murder with a deadly weapon, and conspiracy to commit both crimes. Petitioner was sentenced to three life sentences and two six-year sentences, all to run consecutively. Petitioner filed a direct appeal, which was unsuccessful, followed by a motion for reconsideration, which was denied. Petitioner then filed two successive petitions for post conviction relief in state court. The first petition was denied; Petitioner did not appeal that…

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.