Ryland Schuster v. Randy Blades

357 F. App'x 21
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedNovember 13, 2009
Docket08-35944
StatusUnpublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 357 F. App'x 21 (Ryland Schuster v. Randy Blades) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Ryland Schuster v. Randy Blades, 357 F. App'x 21 (9th Cir. 2009).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Schuster failed to properly exhaust his claims before the Idaho state courts. See Lindquist v. Gardner, 770 F.2d 876, 877 (9th Cir.1985) (holding that to exhaust claims, “[a] petitioner must present his claim to the state courts on direct appeal, or through collateral proceedings”). Thus, his claims are procedurally defaulted. See Idaho Code Ann. § 19-4902 (establishing a one year statute of limitations on post-conviction actions brought under the Idaho Uniform Post-Conviction Procedure Act). Nor has Schuster presented sufficient evidence that either his attorney or the Idaho Supreme Court caused his default. Accordingly, the procedural defaults are not excused, and the district court did not err in dismissing Schuster’s claims with prejudice.

AFFIRMED.

*

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.

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

Related

Schuster v. Blades
176 L. Ed. 2d 1199 (Supreme Court, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
357 F. App'x 21, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ryland-schuster-v-randy-blades-ca9-2009.