From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pruitt v. Hutto

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit
Feb 3, 1977
550 F.2d 1093 (8th Cir. 1977)

Opinion

No. 76-1062.

February 3, 1977.

Appeal from the District Court for the Northern District of Iowa.

Before GIBSON, Chief Judge, and MARKEY, and STEPHENSON, Circuit Judge.

The Honorable Howard T. Markey, Chief Judge, United States Court of Customs and Patent Appeals, sitting by designation.


ORDER

We have granted appellant, John Pruitt, an extension of time to file a petition for rehearing in this case. The petition has been filed and considered by this court and we hereby withdraw that portion of our original opinion, 542 F.2d 458, in this case relating to the exhaustion of state remedies on Pruitt's identification issue. It appears that state prisoners may be precluded by Arkansas law from filing a second post-conviction petition in state courts under Rule 37 of the Arkansas Supreme Court's Rules of Criminal Procedure. Winberry v. State, 256 Ark. 65, 505 S.W.2d 497 (1974). Furthermore, subsequent to our original decision in this case, Pruitt filed a post-conviction petition in an Arkansas state court and his petition was dismissed because he had already filed one post-conviction petition in Arkansas courts.

In light of these developments, we think that in the interest of justice Pruitt should be deemed to have exhausted his state remedies on his identification issue. We therefore remand the matter to the District Court for further consideration of the in-court identification issue.


Summaries of

Pruitt v. Hutto

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit
Feb 3, 1977
550 F.2d 1093 (8th Cir. 1977)
Case details for

Pruitt v. Hutto

Case Details

Full title:JOHN D. PRUITT, APPELLANT, v. TERRELL DON HUTTO, APPELLEE

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit

Date published: Feb 3, 1977

Citations

550 F.2d 1093 (8th Cir. 1977)

Citing Cases

Zemina v. Solem

Id. Of course, if these claims are exhausted in the future (should, for instance, the state courts deny…

Witham v. Mabry

However, under Arkansas law state prisoners are precluded from filing a second post-conviction petition…