Home Menu ↓
Clicking on our sponsor links helps insure continued free access to this website.
Please support our efforts by visiting our sponsors:

 

O'Sullivan v. Boerckel

Docket No.: 97-2048
Argued: March 30, 1999
Decided: June 7, 1999

Topics:

28 USC 2241-2255 (habeas corpus), Criminal Procedure, Habeas Corpus, Administrative Procedure, Comity, Miranda, criminal procedure, habeas, habeas corpus, ineffective assistance of counsel, res judicata

Petitioner: O'Sullivan
Respondent: Boerckel

Court Below: THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT
Citation: 135 F.3d 1194
Lower Court Decision
Supreme Court Docket


526 U.S. 838 (1999)
Question:

Must a state prisoner present all of his claims to a state supreme court in a petition for discretionary review in order to satisfy the exhaustion requirement, 28 U. S. C. Sections 2254(b)(1), (c), for federal habeas relief?

O'Sullivan v. Boerckel
ORAL ARGUMENT

March 30, 1999

Holding: reversed
Decision: Decision: 6 votes for O'Sullivan, 3 vote(s) against

O'Sullivan v. Boerckel
Case Documents

1Opinion in O'Sullivan v. Boerckel
2Opinion in O'Sullivan v. Boerckel
Additional documents for this case are pending review.