Joshua Spencer Hill v. Warden

Filing 3

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS by Judge Dolly M. Gee, re Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2254) 1 . ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED that the Petition be dismissed without prejudice. Case Terminated. Made JS-6. (gr)

1
2

JS-6

3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
WESTERN DIVISION

7
8
9
10
11

JOSHUA SPENCER HILL,

12

Petitioner,

13

v.

14

WARDEN,

15

Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. ED CV 12-00898-DMG (VBK)
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER DISMISSING
PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS
CORPUS

16
17

On June 5, 2012, Joshua Spencer Hill (hereinafter referred to as

18

“Petitioner”) filed a “Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person

19

in State Custody” in the United States District Court for the Central

20

District of California.

21

Superior Court, Petitioner pled guilty to violating California Penal

22

Code § 273.5 and § 2933.5 and was sentenced to two years in state

23

prison. (See Petition at 2.)

24

On December 14, 2011, in Riverside County

It appears conclusively from the face of the Petition that state

25

remedies have not been exhausted.

There is no indication in the

26

Petition whatsoever that the California Court of Appeal or California

27

Supreme Court have been given an opportunity to rule on Petitioner’s

28

contentions. (See Petition at 3-5.)

1

A federal court will not review a state prisoner’s petition for

2

writ

3

exhausted available state remedies on each and every claim presented.

4

28 U.S.C. §2254(b) and (c); see O’Sullivan v. Boerckel, 526 U.S. 838,

5

842 (1999); Rose v. Lundy, 455 U.S. 509, 522 (1982).

6

federalism, 28 U.S.C. §2254 requires federal courts to give the states

7

an initial opportunity to correct alleged violations of its prisoners’

8

federal rights.”

9

1983).

10

of

habeas

corpus

unless

it

appears

that

the

prisoner

has

“For reasons of

Kellotat v. Cupp, 719 F.2d 1027, 1029 (9th Cir.

Exhaustion requires that the prisoner’s contentions be fairly

11

presented to the highest court of the state.

12

F.3d 1147, 1164 (9th Cir. 2009), cert. denied, 130 S.Ct. 3412 (2010).

13

A

14

described in the state court proceedings both the operative facts and

15

the federal legal theory on which his claim is based.

16

Harless, 459 U.S. 4, 6 (1982); Pappageorge v. Sumner, 688 F.2d 1294

17

(9th Cir. 1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1219 (1983).

18
19

claim

has

not

been

fairly

presented

Libberton v. Ryan, 583

unless

the

prisoner

See Anderson v.

ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED that the Petition be dismissed without
prejudice.

20
21

DATED: June 19, 2012
DOLLY M. GEE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

22
23

Presented on
June 8, 2012 by:

24
25
26

has

/s/
VICTOR B. KENTON
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

27
28
2