Ruiz

MEMORANDUM **

The State of California, by and through Warden James Hall, (“the government”) appeals from the district court’s order granting habeas relief to Ruben Parra Ruiz (“Ruiz”). The government asserts that the district court erred in concluding that Ruiz had exhausted state court remedies as to his claim that his rights were violated under Neil v. Biggers, 409 U.S. 188 , 93 S.Ct. 375 , 34 L.Ed.2d 401 (1972), and that the district court granted excessive relief when it ordered the government to retry Ruiz on all three of his gun-related convictions. Because the parties are familiar with the facts of the case, we will not recount them here.

I

The district court correctly held that Ruiz exhausted his Biggers claim. Although the claim appeared in Ruiz’s state appellate brief as a subheading under the claim for relief for insufficiency of the evidence pursuant to Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 , 99 S.Ct. 2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979), the Biggers claim was presented with sufficient particularity to satisfy our exhaustion requirements.

The government’s reliance on Rose v. Palmateer, 395 F.3d 1108 (9th Cir.2005), is misplaced. Unlike the petitioner in Rose , Ruiz did not…