From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jimenez v. Mittler

United States District Court, N.D. California
Aug 20, 2003
No. C 03-4729 VRW (PR) (N.D. Cal. Aug. 20, 2003)

Opinion

No. C 03-4729 VRW (PR)

August 20, 2003


ORDER OF DISMISSAL


Petitioner, a prisoner at the San Mateo County Jail, seeks a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging a recent conviction from the Superior Court of the State of California in and for the County of San Mateo.

Prisoners in state custody who wish to challenge collaterally in federal habeas corpus proceedings either the fact or length of their confinement are first required to exhaust state judicial remedies, either on direct appeal or through collateral proceedings, by presenting the highest state court available with a fair opportunity to rule on the merits of each and every claim they seek to raise in federal court. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b)-(c). Petitioner has not done so. He has not presented the Supreme Court of California with an opportunity to rule on his claims. See O'Sullivan v Boerckel, 526 U.S. 838, 845 (1999) (state's highest court must be given opportunity to rule on claims even if review is discretionary); Larche v Simons, 53 F.3d 1068, 1071-72 (9th Cir 1995) (Supreme Court of California must be given at least one opportunity to review state prisoners' federal claims). The petition for a writ of habeas corpus therefore is DISMISSED without prejudice to refiling after state judicial remedies are exhausted.

The Clerk shall close the file.

SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Jimenez v. Mittler

United States District Court, N.D. California
Aug 20, 2003
No. C 03-4729 VRW (PR) (N.D. Cal. Aug. 20, 2003)
Case details for

Jimenez v. Mittler

Case Details

Full title:ROBERT MICHAEL JIMENEZ, Petitioner, vs. HARVEY MITTLER, et al.…

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

Date published: Aug 20, 2003

Citations

No. C 03-4729 VRW (PR) (N.D. Cal. Aug. 20, 2003)