Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number

DANNY LEE JONES, Petitioner - Appellant, v. CHARLES L. RYAN, Respondent - Appellee.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.


Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona Susan R. Bolton, District Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submitted August 13, 2013
San Francisco, California

Before: REINHARDT, HAWKINS, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.

We remand to the district court to consider, under Martinez v. Ryan, 132 S. Ct. 1309 (2012) and Dickens v. Ryan, 740 F.3d 1302 (9th Cir. 2014) (en banc), Jones's argument that his ineffective assistance of counsel claims are unexhausted, and therefore procedurally defaulted, and that deficient performance by his counsel during his post-conviction relief case in state court excuses the default.

We express no opinion on any other issue raised on appeal. Those issues are preserved for later consideration by the Court, if necessary.

REMANDED.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

Jones v. Ryan
(May 5, 2014)