Reha v. Iowa Supreme Court

Eighth Circuit

Reha v. Iowa Supreme Court

41 F. App'x 15

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit·Decided July 10, 2002·No. No. 02-1530·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Roy Reha appeals from the district court’s¹ order denying his notice of removal and petition for writ of habeas corpus. Reha did not claim his criminal prosecution was racially motivated or that he was a federal officer or agent, see Georgia v. Rachel, 384 U.S. 780, 792, 800, 86 S.Ct. 1783, 16 L.Ed.2d 925 (1966); City of Greenwood v. Peacock, 384 U.S. 808, 824, 86 S.Ct. 1800, 16 L.Ed.2d 944 (1966); and he failed to allege that he exhausted his state remedies, see 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b)(1)(A).

Accordingly, we find that the district court properly remanded Reha’s case, see 28 U.S.C. § 1446(c)(4), and we affirm, see [16]*168th Cir. R. 47B. We also deny the pending motion.

Footnotes

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Roy Reha appeals from the district court’s¹ order denying his notice of removal and petition for writ of habeas corpus. Reha did not claim his criminal prosecution was racially motivated or that he was a federal officer or agent, see Georgia v. Rachel, 384 U.S. 780, 792, 800, 86 S.Ct. 1783, 16 L.Ed.2d 925 (1966); City of Greenwood v. Peacock, 384 U.S. 808, 824, 86 S.Ct. 1800, 16 L.Ed.2d 944 (1966); and he failed to allege that he exhausted his state remedies, see 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b)(1)(A).

Accordingly, we find that the district court properly remanded Reha’s case, see 28 U.S.C. § 1446(c)(4), and we affirm, see [16]*168th Cir. R. 47B. We also deny the pending motion.

Footnotes

Reha v. Iowa Supreme Court, 41 F. App'x 15 (8th Cir. 2002).

Pincite

41 F. App'x 15 (Reha v. Iowa Supreme Court) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Footnotes

Related