Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Cloyce Peters v. Larry Norris, 00-2476 (2001)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit Number: 00-2476 Visitors: 20
Filed: Apr. 16, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 00-2476 _ Cloyce Peters, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Eastern District of Arkansas. Larry Norris, Director, Arkansas * Department of Correction, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellee. * _ Submitted: April 12, 2001 Filed: April 16, 2001 _ Before BOWMAN, BEAM, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Cloyce Peters appeals from the District Court&s dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 pe
More
                     United States Court of Appeals
                           FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
                                    ___________

                                    No. 00-2476
                                    ___________

Cloyce Peters,                           *
                                         *
             Appellant,                  *
                                         * Appeal from the United States
      v.                                 * District Court for the
                                         * Eastern District of Arkansas.
Larry Norris, Director, Arkansas         *
Department of Correction,                *      [UNPUBLISHED]
                                         *
             Appellee.                   *
                                    ___________

                          Submitted: April 12, 2001
                              Filed: April 16, 2001
                                  ___________

Before BOWMAN, BEAM, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.
                          ___________

PER CURIAM.

       Cloyce Peters appeals from the District Court&s dismissal of his 28 U.S.C.
§ 2254 petition for failure to exhaust state remedies. The District Court made its
decision without considering whether any non-futile state remedies remained for Peters.
That is contrary to the procedure established in Smittie v. Lockhart, 
843 F.2d 295
, 296
(8th Cir. 1988).
       Accordingly, we reverse and remand with instructions that the District Court
order the service of Peters's petition on the State and then proceed in accordance with
Smittie.

      A true copy.

             Attest:

                   CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.




                                          -2-

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer