James

James v. Hill

Good Law
171 F. App'x 678
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 20, 2006No. 05-35284California440 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Petitioner Dewey James (“James”) appeals the district court’s dismissal of his petition for writ of habeas corpus, arguing that the district court erred in finding that his ineffective assistance of counsel claims had not been properly exhausted. Be *679 cause the parties are familiar with the facts, we do not recite them in detail. We affirm.

We review de novo a district court’s denial of a writ of habeas corpus for failure to exhaust state court remedies. Fields v. Waddington, 401 F.3d 1018, 1020 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 126 S.Ct. 738 , 163 L.Ed.2d 579 (2005). Federal courts may not grant a writ of habeas corpus unless the state prisoner has exhausted state court remedies. See id. (holding that a petitioner must fairly present his federal claims to the state court in order to satisfy the exhaustion requirement). A petitioner fairly presents federal claims only if he alerts the state court that his claims rest on the Federal Constitution. Id. at 1020-21.

Citation to a state court case analyzing a federal constitutional issue can serve this purpose. See id. at 1021. If the state case discusses both state and federal issues relevant to the petitioner’s…

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.