Slayton v. Smith

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that § 2254 habeas petition should be dismissed without prejudice if petitioner has an available state court remedy that he has not exhausted
• finding that § 2254 habeas petition must be dismissed without prejudice if petitioner has not presented his claims to the appropriate state court and could still do so
• finding that § 2254 habeas petition must be dismissed without prejudice if petitioner has not presented his claims to the appropriate state court and could still do so
• noting the Criminal Justice Act’s “policy of providing blanket coverage of indigents’ representation from arraignment through review by this Court”
• “[A]bsent special circumstances, the Court may not retain jurisdiction pending resort to the state courts for [satisfaction of the exhaustion requirement].”
• “Absent special circumstances, the Court may not retain jurisdiction pending resort to the state courts for [satisfaction of the exhaustion requirement].”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).