Sebastian H. Jiminez v. Bertram Rice, Warden
Cases that cite this one
4 later published cases cite this decision.
- (HC)(DP) Maury v. Martel (United States District Court for the Eastern District of California 2022)
- Wallace Levan Griffey v. Gary Lindsey, Warden (9th Cir. 2003)
- James Tillema v. Miles Long, Warden Frankie Sue Del Papa (9th Cir. 2001)
- Sebastian H. Jiminez v. Bertram Rice, Warden (9th Cir. 2000)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
246 F.3d 1277 (9th Cir. 2001)
SEBASTIAN H. JIMINEZ, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
BERTRAM RICE, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 99-15574
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Filed April 24, 2001
Before: Mary M. Schroeder, Chief Judge, and Robert R. Beezer and Stephen S. Trott, Circuit Judges.
ORDER; Dissent by Chief Judge SCHROEDER.
ORDER
The petition for rehearing is GRANTED and the suggestion for rehearing en banc is DENIED. The opinion filed on August 22, 2000, published at 222 F.3d 1210 (9th Cir. 2000) is WITHDRAWN. Submission of this case is DEFERRED pending a decision by the United States Supreme Court in Artuz v. Walker, 208 F.3d 357 (2d Cir.), cert. granted sub nom Duncan v. Walker, 148 L. Ed. 2d 454, 121 S. Ct. 480 (Nov. 13, 2000), or until further order of this court.
SCHROEDER, Chief Judge, dissenting in part,
I agree that the petition for rehearing should be granted and the original opinion withdrawn. Waiting for the United States Supreme Court to decide whether a federal habeas petition tolls the year limitation period is useful, because it will let Jiminez know whether he will have any time to file a new or amended petition after he exhausts state remedies. It is not necessary to wait for Walker, however, to review the district court's dismissal of this petition, since it was filed before the year period expired. Because it contained unexhausted claims, it should have been dismissed without prejudice. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 120 S. Ct. 1595, 1605-06, 146 L. Ed. 2d 542 (2000).
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.