From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gibbs v. Runnels

United States District Court, E.D. California
Apr 26, 2007
No. CIV S-03-1855 LKK EFB P (E.D. Cal. Apr. 26, 2007)

Opinion

No. CIV S-03-1855 LKK EFB P.

April 26, 2007


ORDER


Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On June 6, 2006, the court granted respondents 15 days within which to respond to petitioner's contention that he has exhausted his claim that his counsel was ineffective in failing to move for a new trial. Respondents have not filed any documents in response to petitioner's contention nor otherwise responded to the court's order. It appears that respondents have waived the issue of exhaustion. The court will therefore deem petitioner's claim exhausted.

So ordered.


Summaries of

Gibbs v. Runnels

United States District Court, E.D. California
Apr 26, 2007
No. CIV S-03-1855 LKK EFB P (E.D. Cal. Apr. 26, 2007)
Case details for

Gibbs v. Runnels

Case Details

Full title:ANTHONY JAMES GIBBS, Petitioner, v. D.L. RUNNELS, Warden, et al.…

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: Apr 26, 2007

Citations

No. CIV S-03-1855 LKK EFB P (E.D. Cal. Apr. 26, 2007)