The following excerpt is from Cole v. Easter, 15 F.3d 1084 (9th Cir. 1994):
We review de novo the denial of a petition for habeas corpus. Adams v. Peterson, 968 F.2d 835, 843 (9th Cir.1992) (en banc), cert. denied, 113 S.Ct. 1818 (1993).
1. Dismissal of Habeas Petition for Failure to Exhaust
Alaska argues that Cole's petition contains an unexhausted claim and should be dismissed. See Rose v. Lundy, 455 U.S. 509, 510 (1982) (mixed petition with exhausted and unexhausted claims should be dismissed). We disagree.
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.