Ellie v. Davis-Director TDCJ-CID, 3:17-cv-01499

Ellie, pro se petitioner, filed a federal habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. §2254 in the Northern District of Texas.
He pled guilty to aggravated robbery on August 9, 2016 and was sentenced to five years’ imprisonment.
He challenges identification and extradition procedures and alleges ineffective assistance of counsel during the guilty-plea proceedings.
He concedes he did not file a direct appeal and his state habeas application filed November 14, 2016 has not received a ruling.
The magistrate recommends dismissal without prejudice for failure to exhaust state court remedies.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Exhaustion of state-court remedies for habeas claims	Ellie contends exhaustion satisfied by presenting claims to state court	Face of record shows no direct appeal or state habeas challenge	Unexhausted; dismissal without prejudice for failure to exhaust
Effect of exhaustion rule on petition	Exhaustion should allow federal review of claims	No exhaustion; state court has not yet had opportunity to adjudicate	Requires dismissal without prejudice due to unexhausted claims

Rhines v. Weber, 544 U.S. 269 (U.S. 2005) (stay-and-abeyance framework to avoid improper obstruction of state proceedings)
Rose v. Lundy, 455 U.S. 509 (U.S. 1982) (exhaustion required before federal review; mix of habeas claims not properly presented barred)
Morris v. Dretke, 379 F.3d 199 (5th Cir. 2004) (exhaustion satisfied when substance presented to highest state court)
Mercadel v. Cain, 179 F.3d 271 (5th Cir. 1999) (exhaustion via state court petition permits federal review)
Whitehead v. Johnson, 157 F.3d 384 (5th Cir. 1998) (Texas procedural avenues for exhaustion via Article 11.07)