Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01858/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01858-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jaime Beltran
Petitioner
Warren L. Montgomery
Respondent

Document Text:

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JAIME BELTRAN,

Petitioner,

v.

WARREN L. MONTGOMERY, Warden, 

Calipatria State Prison,

Respondent.

Case No. 1:15-cv-01858-DAD-SKO HC

ORDER WITHDRAWING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS RECOMMENDING 

DISMISSAL OF THE PETITION FOR 

FAILURE TO EXHAUST STATE REMEDIES

(Doc. 6) 

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The Court referred the matter to the undersigned Magistrate Judge 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Rules 302 and 304.

On December 30, 2015, the undersigned issued findings and recommendation that the Court 

dismiss the petition because of Petitioner's failure to exhaust state remedies. On February 29, 2016, 

Petitioner notified the Court that the California Supreme Court denied his petition for review on 

February 17, 2016.

Generally, a petitioner must have fully exhausted state remedies at the time he files for 

federal habeas relief. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b); Rose v. Lundy, 455 U.S. 509, 515-20 (1982). A claim is 

exhausted once it has been fairly presented to the state's highest court. Schwartzmiller v. Gardner, 

752 F.2d 1341, 1344 (9th Cir. 1984). Exhaustion is not jurisdictional, however, but is a matter of 

federal-state comity. Id. at 1345. As a result, "an appellate court may give relief if state remedies 

are exhausted by the time it acts, even if these remedies were not exhausted when the habeas corpus 

Case 1:15-cv-01858-DAD-SKO Document 9 Filed 03/01/16 Page 1 of 2
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

petition was filed." Id.; Buffalo v. Sunn, 854 F.2d 1158, 1163 (9th Cir. 1988). When the highest state 

court has acted on the claim, the barrier to federal habeas consideration of the claim's substantive 

merits is removed, and the federal court may proceed to consider it. Sharpe v. Buchanan, 317 U.S. 

238, 239 (1942).

Petitioner has now fully exhausted his state court remedies. Accordingly, the undersigned 

hereby WITHDRAWS the findings and recommendations filed on December 30, 2015.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 29, 2016 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-01858-DAD-SKO Document 9 Filed 03/01/16 Page 2 of 2