Danny Ray Garcia v- Christian Pfeiffer

facts and the legal principles that control each claim to the state courts. Castillo v. McFadden, 399 F.3d 993, 999 (9th Cir. 2005). Where none of the claims have been presented to the highest state court as required by the exhaustion requirement, the Court must dismiss the petition. Rasberry v. Garcia, 448 F.3d 1150, 1154 (9th Cir. 2006). Here, Petitioner’s single claim for relief was not fairly presented to the California Supreme Court. Indeed, as Petitioner acknowledges in his Petition, “Ground 1 was not presented to the California Supreme Court as this ground was not part of Petitioner’s Appeal.” See Dkt. 1 at 7.

The Court will consider either of the following two options an appropriate response to this Order: (1) Petitioner may voluntarily dismiss the Petition; or (2) Petitioner may file a statement with the Court explaining whether his claim is or is not exhausted. If Petitioner’s statement recognizes his claim as unexhausted, Petitioner must

CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL

Case No. EDCV 21-0559-JWH (MAR) Date: May 4, 2021 Title: also decide whether he seeks a stay1 of the Petition pursuant to either Rhines v. Weber, 544 U.S. 269 (2005) (“Rhines stay”) or…