Magrihi

(HC) Burns v. Magrihi

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaDecember 27, 20212:21-cv-02147California775 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 DWAYNE B. BURNS, No. 2: 21-cv-2147 KJN P Petitioner, v. ORDER ERIC MAGRIHI, Respondent. 16 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, together with an application to proceed in forma pauperis. Review of the petition shows that petitioner failed to exhaust state court remedies. Petitioner represents that the one claim raised in the petition (ineffective assistance of counsel) has not been presented to the California Supreme Court. The exhaustion of state court remedies is a prerequisite to the granting of a petition for writ of habeas corpus. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b)(1). If exhaustion is to be waived, it must be waived explicitly by respondent’s counsel. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b)(3). A waiver of exhaustion, thus, may not be implied or inferred. A petitioner satisfies the exhaustion requirement by providing the highest state court with a…

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.