Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Rhines Vs. Weber

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Mar 30, 2005

Citation network · 7-day free trial

Brief every cited case in minutes

Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

32 entries 4 linked 28 unlinked
Show
  1. Woodford Vs. Garceau US Supreme Court · Mar 25, 2003
  2. Rose Vs. Lundy US Supreme Court · Mar 03, 1982
  3. Darr Vs. Burford US Supreme Court · Apr 03, 1950
  4. Slack Vs. Mcdaniel US Supreme Court · Apr 26, 2000
  5. Syllabus October Term, 2004 Rhines V. Weber
    Search
  6. Supreme Court of the United States Rhines V. Weber
    Search
  7. requirement by dismissing mixed petitions without prejudice and allowing petitioners to return to state court. Rose v. Lundy
    Search
  8. an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment, in which Ginsburg and Breyer, JJ., joined. Rhines v. Weber
    Search
  9. Opinion of the Court Rhines V. Weber
    Search
  10. Supreme Court of the United States No. 03-9046 Charles Russell Rhines, Petitioner V. Douglas
    Search
  11. to death. His conviction became final on December 2, 1996, when we denied his initial petition for certiorari. Rhines v. South
    Search
  12. The state court denied his petition, and the Supreme Court of South Dakota affirmed on February 9, 2000, Rhines v. Weber
    Search
  13. of the 35 claims had not been exhausted. At this time, the AEDPA 1-year statute of limitations had run. See Duncan v. Walker
    Search
  14. mixed petition to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. Relying on its decision in Akins v. Kenney
    Search
  15. Compare, e.g. , Crews v. Horn
    Search
  16. and Zarvela v. Artuz
    Search
  17. with 346 F. 3d 799 (2003) (case below). II Fourteen years before Congress enacted AEDPA, we held in Rose v. Lundy
    Search
  18. Id ., at 518 (quoting Darr v. Burford
    Search
  19. unexhausted claims could come back to federal court to present their perfected petitions with relative ease. See Slack v. McDaniel
    Search
  20. petitioner to proceed in federal court. District courts do ordinarily have authority to issue stays, see Landis v. North
    Search
  21. Co. , 299 U. S. 248 , 254 (1936), where such a stay would be a proper exercise of discretion, see Clinton v. Jones
    Search
  22. s grant of a stay in this case constituted an abuse of discretion. It is so ordered. Rhines v. Weber
    Search
  23. see also Slack v. McDaniel
    Search
  24. U. S. 473 , 487 (2000). Rhines v. Weber
    Search
  25. Charles Russell Rhines, Petitioner V. Douglas
    Search
  26. Rhines v. South
    Search
  27. See Duncan v. Walker
    Search
  28. Akins v. Kenney
    Search
  29. Crews v. Horn
    Search
  30. See Slack v. McDaniel
    Search
  31. Landis v. North
    Search
  32. Clinton v. Jones
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial