Neuschmid

(HC) Johnson v. Neuschmid

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMarch 12, 20212:20-cv-01410California796 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 GERALD R. JOHNSON, No. 2:20-CV-1410-KJM-DMC-P Petitioner, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ROBERT NEUSCHMID, Respondent. 16 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Pending before the Court is Respondent’s unopposed motion to dismiss. See ECF No. 17. Respondent argues the claims raised in the petition are unexhausted. See id. The Court agrees. Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b), the exhaustion of available state remedies is required before claims can be granted by the federal court in a habeas corpus case. See Rose v. Lundy, 455 U.S. 509 (1982); see also Kelly v. Small, 315 F.3d 1063, 1066 (9th Cir. 2003); Hunt v. Pliler, 336 F.3d 839 (9th Cir. 2003). The exhaustion doctrine is based on a policy of federal and state comity, designed to give state courts the initial opportunity to correct alleged constitutional 27…

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.