The following excerpt is from Sager v. Maass, 919 F.2d 145 (9th Cir. 1990):
Generally, when a state allows review of a constitutional violation either on direct appeal or by collateral attack, a prisoner need exhaust only one avenue of relief before bringing a habeas petition in federal court. Turner v. Compoy, 827 F.2d 526, 529 (9th Cir.1987), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1059 (1989). Nevertheless, when a state "mandate[s] a particular procedure to be used to the exclusion of other avenues of seeking relief ..., presenting an issue to the state's highest court via a statutorily deviating path will not exhaust state remedies." Id. (holding that although a statutorily-mandated collateral procedure would preclude exhaustion by direct appeal, a mere preference by the state court that claims of ineffective assistance of counsel be brought in a habeas petition does not preclude exhaustion by direct appeal).
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.