United States District Court, D. Idaho
INITIAL REVIEW ORDER
Honorable Ronald E. Bush, Chief U.S. Magistrate Judge.
Ronald Scott Eddington (Petitioner) has filed a Petition for
Writ of Habeas Corpus challenging his state court conviction.
(Dkt. 1.) Federal habeas corpus relief is available to
petitioners who are held in custody under a state court
judgment that violates the Constitution, laws, or treaties of
the United States. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a).
Court is required to review each newly-filed habeas corpus
petition to determine whether it is should be served upon the
respondent, amended, or summarily dismissed. See 28
U.S.C. § 2243. If “it plainly appears from the
face of the petition and any attached exhibits that the
petitioner is not entitled to relief in the district court,
” the petition will be summarily dismissed. Rule 4 of
the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases.
reviewed the Petition, the Court concludes that Petitioner
may proceed to the next stage of litigation in this matter.
was convicted of second degree kidnaping and aggravated
assault with a deadly weapon in a criminal action in the
Fourth Judicial District Court in Ada County, Idaho. His
judgment of conviction was entered on or about March 18,
2014. Petitioner followed his conviction with a direct appeal
and a post-conviction action, neither of which was
successful. He now petitions the Court for habeas corpus
Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, Petitioner brings three
Sixth Amendment ineffective assistance of trial counsel
claims: first, that trial counsel had an actual conflict of
interest when he represented both Petitioner and his mother
simultaneously on related criminal charges; second, that
trial counsel pressured Petitioner to plead guilty because
there was a conflict of interest; and third, that trial
counsel failed to investigate the discovery he obtained in
the case, such as failing to listen to the audio recordings
of police interviews of Petitioner's ex-wife, and counsel
failed to prepare adequately for sentencing because of the
conflict of interest.
has stated colorable federal claims upon which he can
proceed. It is unclear whether Petitioner has properly
exhausted his claim in the state court system or whether the
claims are timely. The Court does not have the full record
before it to make a final determination on these procedural
matters. The Court will order the Clerk of Court to serve the
Petition upon Respondent, who will be permitted to file an
answer or a pre-answer motion for summary dismissal.
Standards of Law
Petitioner's status as a pro se litigant, the
Court provides the following habeas corpus standards of law
which may apply to Petitioner's case, depending on
Exhaustion of State Court Remedies
corpus law requires that a petitioner “exhaust”
his state court remedies before pursuing a claim in a federal
habeas petition. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b). To exhaust a
claim, a habeas petitioner must fairly present it as a
federal claim to the highest state court for review in the
manner prescribed by state law. See O'Sullivan v.
Boerckel, 526 U.S. 838, 845 (1999). Unless a petitioner
has exhausted his state court remedies relative to a
particular claim, a federal ...