Charlton Paul Green v. State of Georgia , 570 F. App'x 893 ( 2014 )

Case: 14-10098 Date Filed: 06/30/2014 Page: 1 of 3
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 14-10098
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 1:11-cv-04544-AT
CHARLTON PAUL GREEN,
Petitioner-Appellee,
versus
STATE OF GEORGIA,
COMMISSIONER, GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
Respondents-Appellants.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Georgia
________________________
(June 30, 2014)
Before TJOFLAT, HULL and MARCUS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Case: 14-10098 Date Filed: 06/30/2014 Page: 2 of 3
On December 28, 2011, Charlton Green petitioned the District Court to issue
a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 setting aside his 2009
conviction in the Cherokee County Superior Court for failing to register as a sexual
offender. 1 His petition presented three claims for relief: (1) his attorney provided
ineffective assistance by failing to object at trial to the introduction into evidence
of his January 1999 conviction in the Pickens County Superior Court of the crime
of sodomy because, under Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558, 123 S. Ct. 2472, 156
L. Ed. 2d 508 (2003), sodomy was no longer a crime; (2) the use of the sodomy
conviction to obtain the instant conviction denied him substantive due process; and
(3) the use of that conviction to obtain the instant conviction denied him procedural
due process. The District Court issued the writ on claim (1), but failed to rule on
claims (2) and (3). The State appeals, arguing in part that the court erred in failing
to rule on those two claims.
We have previously directed district courts to resolve all claims for relief
raised in a § 2254 petition for a writ of habeas corpus, “regardless of whether
habeas relief is granted or denied.” Clisby v. Jones, 960 F.2d 925, 936 (11th Cir.
1992) (en banc). When a district court fails to do so, we vacate the judgment and
remand for consideration of all of the petitioner’s claims. Id. The District Court’s
1
Green’s conviction was affirmed in Green v. State, 692 S.E.2d 784 (Ga. App. 2010).
2
Case: 14-10098 Date Filed: 06/30/2014 Page: 3 of 3
judgment is accordingly vacated and the case is remanded with the instruction that
the court rule on claims (2) and (3).
SO ORDERED.
3