Court Opinion

ID: 9869012
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-26 19:12:30.066819+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:45:58.860020
License: Public Domain

MERRITT, Circuit Judge,
concurring.
I agree with Judge Batchelder that Peterson does not comply with § 2254(d). That is because he never tells us what error the state court made.
The bottom-line problem for me in this case is: what specific relief in habeas does Peterson ask for—release, a reduction in sentence, a trial? Does he claim that his original plea was coerced or that he wants now to enter a plea of not guilty by reason of insanity, or what? His habeas petition does not state what relief he seeks. His basic claim is that due process of law entitles him to a direct appeal in state court and that we should issue an order requiring the state court to allow him to make a direct appeal of his state court sentence, but he does not explain why the state trial court was wrong to allow him to plead guilty or why the sentence for rape was wrong or invalid under either federal or state law. The federal habeas petition does not state a constitutional claim that anything that happened in the state proceeding was in error. In order to obtain federal habeas relief an understandable federal constitutional claim must be stated.