What is the difference between the exhaustion requirement and the exhaustion rule?

California, United States of America


The following excerpt is from In re Reno, S124660 (Cal. 2012):

30. As we have explained, our procedural rules are designed to regularize the postconviction review process, upholding the finality of judgments while leaving open a safety valve for the presentation of legitimate claims. By contrast, the federal exhaustion requirement "is grounded in principles of comity and reflects a desire to 'protect the state courts' role in the enforcement of federal law,' [citation]. In addition, the requirement is based upon a pragmatic recognition that 'federal claims that have been fully exhausted in state courts will more often be accompanied by a complete factual record to aid the federal courts in their review.' [Citation.] Codified since 1948 . . . , the exhaustion rule, while not a jurisdictional requirement [citation], creates a 'strong presumption in favor of requiring the prisoner to pursue his available state remedies.' " (Castille v. Peoples (1989) 489 U.S. 346, 349, fn. omitted.)

Other Questions


Does the "right ruling, wrong reasoning" rule apply to an evidentiary ruling that required the trial court to make findings of fact? (California, United States of America)
Is it necessary or required that the rule of Adams v. Murakami is not constitutionally required? (California, United States of America)
What is the difference between the requirement of proof beyond a reasonable doubt and the test required by the Sixth Amendment? (California, United States of America)
Can a defendant receive a separate sentence for unlawful acts committed at different times for different amounts of money against different victims? (California, United States of America)
Does a rule requiring substitution of a new class representative after a ruling that the named plaintiff is inadequate be inconsistent with the general principle that a trial court has discretion in deciding whether to permit an amended complaint? (California, United States of America)
Can a defendant manipulate the rule of rule 31(d) to bypass the statutory certificate requirement under section 1237.5 of the Criminal Code? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted the rule that prior determination is not conclusive either if injustice would result or if the public interest requires that the prior determination not to be foreclosed? (California, United States of America)
In what circumstances will a prosecution be required to provide instructions on the "natural and probable consequences" rule in an assault case? (California, United States of America)
Does the corpus delicti rule require corroboration of a criminal injury? (California, United States of America)
Can a new objection and waiver rule be applied retroactively when existing law does not require an objection? (California, United States of America)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.