Hodge v. Hornung

Type

Opinion of the Court

Per curiam

Yes — no individual author

Filed

Oct. 17, 2002

Case

Hodge v. Hornung

Case status

Decided

Source The opinion is per curiam: issued in the name of the court, with no individual author. This is a fact about the opinion, not missing data.

The first passage of the document, as extracted by the source provider.

MEMORANDUM ** Petitioner Johnny Lee Hodge, a California state prisoner, appeals the district court’s dismissal without prejudice of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition for failure to exhaust state remedies. We review the district court’s decision to grant or deny a 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition de novo. Dubria v. Smith, 224 F.3d 995, 1000 (9th Cir.2000) (en banc), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1148 , 121 S.Ct. 1089 , 148 L.Ed.2d 963 (2001). We vacate and remand. A state prisoner must exhaust available remedies in state courts before proceeding with a federal habeas corpus petition. 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (b); Duckworth v. Serrano, 454 U.S. 1, 3 , 102 S.Ct. 18 , 70 L.Ed.2d 1 (1981) (per curiam); Larche v. Simons, 53 F.3d 1068, 1071 (9th Cir.1995). Exhaustion requires that the federal claim be fairly presented to the state’s highest court to which appeal is available. O’Sullivan v. Boerckel, 526 U.S. 838, 844-847 , 119 S.Ct. 1728 , 144 L.Ed.2d 1 (1999); Picard v. Connor, 404 U.S. 270, 275 , 92 S.Ct. 509 , 30 L.Ed.2d 438 (1971). Hodge filed a habeas petition pro se with the California Supreme Court, which was dismissed with citations to In re Swain, 34 Cal.2d 300, 304 , 209 P.2d 793 (19…

Source Extract supplied by CourtListener. Benchlight does not host the document — read the authoritative text in the court's own PDF.