Pitchess v. Davis

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that \even if Rule 60(b) could be read to apply to this situation [— reopening a judgment in a habeas case —] it could not alter the statutory command\
• petitioner’s claim of unfairness in re-trial due to the unavailability of evidence should have been first raised and exhausted in the state courts
• writ of prohibition presented to appeals court does not suffice to demonstrate exhaustion for habeas corpus relief
• motion to California Supreme Court for pretrial writ of prohibition does not exhaust state remedies because not an adjudication on the merits and full post-trial appellate review is available after conviction, citing Medina
• district court could clarify whether the unconditional writ permitted retrial

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).