Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-03226/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-03226-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ROBERT JOSEPH CARRILLO,

Petitioner,

 vs.

MIKE EVANS, Warden,

Respondent. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 06-3226 CRB (PR)

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

(Docs # 2 & 4)

Petitioner, a state prisoner incarcerated at Salinas Valley State Prison, has

filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging a

July 8, 2004 conviction for failure to register as a sex offender obtained in the

Superior Court of the State of California in and for the County of Monterey. 

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. Although
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 2

petitioner appealed and the California Court of Appeal affirmed the conviction in

case number H027767 on May 3, 2005, petitioner has not presented the Supreme

Court of California with an opportunity to consider and 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 and terminate all pending motions (see, e.g.,

docs # 2 & 4) as moot. No fee is due. 

SO ORDERED.

DATED: June 2, 2006 

CHARLES R. BREYER

United States District Judge