Benavidez

(HC) Pulizzano v. Benavidez

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJanuary 13, 20222:21-cv-00503California932 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JAMES JOSEPH PULIZZANO, No. 2:21-cv-0503 WBS CKD P Petitioner, v. ORDER DANIEL E. CUEVA, Respondent. 16 Petitioner is a California prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. He is serving a sentence of 22 years imprisonment imposed upon several Tehama County convictions including attempted murder. ECF 5. Petitioner presents four grounds for relief. Respondent moves for dismissal arguing that petitioner failed to exhaust state court remedies as to ground 4 and part of ground 2. 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). A petitioner satisfies the exhaustion requirement by providing the highest state court with a full and fair opportunity to consider all claims before presenting them to the federal court. Picard v. Connor, 404 U.S. 270, 276 (1971). After reviewing…

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.