Brooks v. Pierce

Summary

The United States District Court for the Northern District of California dismissed Marcel Brooks’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition because his ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim had not been exhausted in state court and he failed to respond to the court’s order regarding further proceedings. The court denied a certificate of appealability, entered judgment for the respondent, and directed the Clerk to close the case.

Holdings

1. The petition had to be dismissed because its sole claim was unexhausted and Brooks did not elect a procedure that would allow the claim to proceed after exhaustion.
2. Brooks was not entitled to a certificate of appealability because he did not make the required showing under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c).

Questions Presented

1. Whether the federal habeas petition had to be dismissed because its sole ineffective-assistance claim had not been exhausted in state court.
2. Whether Brooks was entitled to a certificate of appealability.

Disposition

dismissed