Court Opinion

ID: 9482452
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 08:50:58.191215+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:49:00.476106
License: Public Domain

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING
Jan. 21, 1992.
PER CURIAM:
The petition for rehearing is correct in its characterization of the effect of 28 U.S.C. § 1746. It is in all other respects factually incorrect. The Gamino claim was not properly presented to the district court; the state was not able to address the claim in its answer to the district court; it was not referred to or specifically addressed by the district court; and it was not presented at all to the state courts. The state has not waived exhaustion or any of the petitioner’s other defaults in presenting the claim. The petition for rehearing is DENIED.