Joseph Buffalo v. Franklin Sunn, Director D.S.S.H.

11 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 1305 (9th Cir. 1988) · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · August 16, 1988 · No. No. 87-2032

Summary

The Ninth Circuit held that the district court should have conducted an evidentiary hearing to resolve conflicting affidavits concerning whether a prison lockdown constituted cause for Joseph Buffalo's procedural default in failing to seek review of his state collateral attack. The court reversed and remanded without deciding the ultimate cause-and-prejudice issue or the merits of Buffalo's ineffective-assistance claim.

Holdings

  1. The notice of appeal sufficiently demonstrated the State's intent to appeal and complied with Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 3(c), giving the Ninth Circuit jurisdiction.
  2. The court would not treat the State's notice of appeal as a motion for reconsideration or dismiss the appeal pending reconsideration because the State never filed a separate reconsideration motion and the notice primarily sought appellate review.
  3. When conflicting affidavits create a factual dispute concerning the cause of a state procedural default in a federal habeas case, the district court must hold an evidentiary hearing unless other evidence in the record is dispositive or the state court has made relevant factual findings.
  4. The court did not decide whether Buffalo ultimately established cause or prejudice, or whether trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance; those questions were left for the district court after the evidentiary hearing.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the State's notice of appeal sufficiently manifested a clear intent to appeal under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 3(c).
  2. Whether the State's notice of appeal should be treated as a motion for reconsideration that nullified or postponed the appeal.
  3. Whether the district court erred by resolving conflicting affidavits concerning the alleged prison-lockdown impediment without holding an evidentiary hearing.
  4. Whether Buffalo's failure to timely seek Hawaii Supreme Court review of the denial of his Rule 40 petition was excused by cause under the cause-and-prejudice standard.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded

Cases Cited (29)

  • Wainwright v. Sykes, 433 U.S. 72 (1977)(followed)
  • Peter Starr Production Co. v. Twin Continental Films, Inc., 783 F.2d 1440, 1442 (9th Cir. 1986)(followed)
  • McMillan v. Barksdale, 823 F.2d 981, 983 (6th Cir. 1987)(followed)
  • Mosley v. Cozby, 813 F.2d 659, 660 (5th Cir. 1987)(distinguished)
  • Cel-A-Pak v. California Agricultural Labor Relations Board, 680 F.2d 664, 667 (9th Cir. 1982) (per curiam)(followed)
  • Griggs v. Provident Consumer Discount Co., 459 U.S. 56, 60-61 (1982) (per curiam)(distinguished)
  • United States v. Gargano, 826 F.2d 610, 611 (7th Cir. 1987)(distinguished)
  • Jackson v. Cupp, 693 F.2d 867, 868-69 (9th Cir. 1982) (per curiam)(followed)
  • Granberry v. Greer, 481 U.S. 129 (1987)(followed)
  • Rose v. Lundy, 455 U.S. 509, 515-20 (1982)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 29.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…