Rhines v. Weber - 03-9046 (2005)
- Syllabus
- Opinion (Justice O’Connor)
- Concurrence (Justice Stevens,)
- Concurrence (Justice Stevens,)
- Concurrence (Justice Souter)
- Concurrence (Justice Souter)
544 U. S. ____ (2005)
544 U. S. ____ (2005)
544 U. S. ____ (2005)
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
NO. 03-9046
CHARLES RUSSELL RHINES, PETITIONER v. DOUGLAS WEBER, WARDEN
on writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the eighth circuit
[March 30, 2005]
Justice Souter, with whom Justice Ginsburg and Justice Breyer join, concurring in part and concurring in the judgment.
I join the Court’s opinion with one reservation, not doctrinal but practical. Instead of conditioning stay-and-abeyance on “good cause” for delay, ante, at 7, I would simply hold the order unavailable on a demonstration of “intentionally dilatory litigation tactics,” ante, at 8. The trickiness of some exhaustion determinations promises to infect issues of good cause when a court finds a failure to exhaust; pro se petitioners (as most habeas petitioners are) do not come well trained to address such matters. I fear that threshold enquiries into good cause will give the district courts too much trouble to be worth the time; far better to wait for the alarm to sound when there is some indication that a petitioner is gaming the system.
