ROBERT GRUBBS, APPELLANT,
v.
HOYT C. CUPP, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that a petitioner must exhaust state remedies by applying to the state's highest court, even if it seems futile, to satisfy federal habeas corpus requirements.
A prisoner sought federal habeas corpus relief without first pursuing his post-conviction claims to the Oregon Court of Appeals or Supreme Court. He c…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Deliberate Bypass cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The appeal in this denial of habeas corpus relief raises the question whether the petitioner failed to exhaust state remedies. 28 U.S.C. § 2254.
Oregon has a comprehensive post-conviction relief statute which affords state prisoners relief similar to that which can be sought in federal court when constitutional defects in state court convictions are alleged. Or.Rev.Stat, 138.510 et seq.
The prisoner did not press his collateral attack either to the Oregon Court of Appeals or to the state Supreme Court. He says he was advised by counsel that a petition for review in the state system would have been futile. He filed a petition for habeas corpus in federal court after receiving a letter from his counsel saying that counsel could, do no more for him.
Exhaustion of state remedies, as required by 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b), includes an application to the state’s highest court, even if in some cases the effort is futile. Cartwright v. Cupp, 650 F. 2d 1103, 1104 (9th Cir 1981); Carothers v. Rhay, 594 F. 2d 225, 228 (9th Cir. 1979).
The cause is remanded to the district court for that court to determine whether the prisoner’s failure to seek post-conviction relief in the state courts, or his failure to-appeal, constituted deliberate bypass of an available state remedy or whether he can show that his failure should be excused and cause and prejudice found. Engle v. Isaac, 456 U.S. 107, 102 S.Ct. 1558, 71 S.Ct. 783 (1982); Wainwright v. Sykes, 433 U.S. 72, 97 S.Ct. 2497, 53 L.Ed.2d 594 (1977); Ventura v. Cupp, 690 F. 2d 740 (9th Cir., 1982).
Vacated and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Wainwright v. Sykes, 433 U.S. 72 (U.S. 1977)
- Engle v. Isaac, 456 U.S. 107 (U.S. 1982)
- Tenney v. Brandhove, 341 U.S. 367 (U.S. 1951)
- John v. Carothers, 594 F.2d 225 (9th Cir. 1979)
- Cartwright v. Hoyt C. Cupp, 650 F.2d 1103 (9th Cir. 1981)
- Ventura v. Hoyt C. Cupp, 690 F.2d 740 (9th Cir. 1982)