Douglas James v. Sheryl Pliler Daniel E. Lungren, Attorney General

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the decision to hold an exhausted petition in abeyance is a matter of trial court’s discretion
• holding that it is error to fail to inform a habeas petitioner about his opportunity to amend a partially-exhausted petition even though the decision to grant leave to amend is within the discretion of the trial court
• holding that it is error to fail to inform a habeas petitioner about his opportunity to amend a partially-exhausted petition even though the decision to grant leave to amend is within the discretion of the trial court
• holding that it is error to fail to inform a habeas petitioner about his opportunity to amend a partially-exhausted petition even though the decision to grant leave to amend is within the discretion of the trial court
• holding that it is error to fail to inform a habeas petitioner about his opportunity to amend a partially-exhausted petition even though the decision to grant leave to amend is within the discretion of the trial court
• emphasizing a pro se litigant “is entitled to certain procedural protections”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).