Whitton v. Dixon · ¶39
This exhaustion failure barred federal habeas relief, but Whitton never addressed it in the District Court. Nor did he ask for a stay of federal proceedings to enable him to cure the problem. Cf. Rhines v. Weber, 544 U. S. 269, 276–278 (2005). If he asked for a stay now, it would be an abuse of discretion to grant it—Whitton discovered the factual basis for this claim in May 2021, at the latest, and he has still not exhausted his claim in state court, so it is likely too late for him to even attempt to do so. See Mungin v. State, 320 So. 3d 624, 625–626 (Fla. 2020) (per curiam). In such circumstances, federal courts can and do simply deny the habeas claim. See McBride v. Skipper, 76 F. 4th 509, 512–513 (CA6 2023) (federal court need not consider a stay when petitioner does not ask for one); Banks v. Allison, 140 F. 4th 1181, 1185– 1189 (CA9 2025) (federal court need not consider a stay…Read in context ›
preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.