Sharrieff v. Cathel

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that where a state “clearly, explicitly, and unambiguously relinquished and abandoned its right to assert the nonexhaustion defense” with respect to a claim, “[t]he fact that the State based its concession on a flawed legal conclusion is of no consequence”
• noting in dictum that the Supreme Court raised the possibility in Castille of this exception to the exhaustion requirement
• noting in dictum that the Supreme Court raised the possibility in Castille of this exception to the exhaustion requirement
• noting in dictum that the Supreme Court has “recognized exceptions” to the fair presentation re-qxiirement “where the State has actually passed upon the claim” (quoting Castille v. Peoples, 489 U.S. 346, 351, 109 S.Ct. 1056, 103 L.Ed.2d 380 (1989))
• State’s argument before the district court that Mr. Fontenot merely “added bits and pieces of argument to his Brady and actual innocence claims based upon the recently produced Ada police reports”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).