CHARLES RUSSELL RHINES

DOB:
Race: White
Gender: Male

County of conviction: Pennington
Number of counts: One
Race of victim: White
Gender of victim: Male
Date of crime: March 8, 1992
Date of sentencing: Jan. 29, 1993

Trial Counsel:

Wayne Gilbert

Joseph Butler

Current proceedings:

• Currently stayed in the district court for exhaustion of state claims.  U.S. District Court, D.S.D. Case No. 5:00-CV-05020-KES (before Schreier, J.).
   
• On remand to the District Court by the Eighth Circuit, per the Supreme Court, for determination of exhausted habeas claims, U.S. District Court, D.S.D. Case No. 5:00-CV-05020-KES (before Schreier, J.)
   
• NOA of the order by the Eighth Circuit vacating and remanding, filed by the A.G. in the District Court, July 11, 2005

Last judicial decision:

• Eighth Circuit, remanding to the District Court, held that district court was required to analyze each unexhausted claim to determine whether petitioner had good cause for failing to exhaust the claim and whether it is potentially meritorious, and consider whether petitioner had engaged in abusive litigation tactics or intentional delay.  Rhines v. Weber, 409 F.3d 982 (8th Cir. 2005). (Eighth Circuit Case No. 02-2990).
   
• A federal district court has discretion to stay a mixed habeas petition containing exhausted and unexhausted claims to allow the petitioner to present his unexhausted claims to the state court in the first instance, and then to return to federal court for review of his perfected petition.  Rhines v. Weber, 125 S.Ct. 1528 (U.S. 2005).

Current counsel:

Roberto A. Lange
Davenport, Evans, Hurwitz & Smith
PO Box 1030
Sioux Falls, SD 57101
605-336-2880

John A. Schlimgen
Stuart, Gerry & Schlimgen
P.O. Box 966
507 W. 10th St.
Sioux Falls, SD 57101
605-336-6400

Reported Opinions:

• Supreme Court denied motion of Roberto Lange for excess compensation.  Rhines v. Weber, 126 S.Ct. 325 (U.S. 2005).
   
• Eighth Circuit, remanding to the District Court, held that district court was required to analyze each unexhausted claim to determine whether petitioner had good cause for failing to exhaust the claim and whether it is potentially meritorious, and consider whether petitioner had engaged in abusive litigation tactics or intentional delay.  Rhines v. Weber, 409 F.3d 982 (8th Cir. 2005). (Eighth Circuit Case No. 02-2990).
   
• A federal district court has discretion to stay a mixed habeas petition containing exhausted and unexhausted claims to allow the petitioner to present his unexhausted claims to the state court in the first instance, and then to return to federal court for review of his perfected petition.  Rhines v. Weber, 125 S.Ct. 1528 (U.S. 2005).
   
• Stay of federal habeas petition (to permit state-court exhaustion of unexhausted claims) vacated and remanded on state's interlocutory appeal by Rhines v. Weber, 346 F.3d 799 (8th Cir. 2003),  cert. granted, 124 S.Ct. 2905  (U.S. Jun. 28, 2004).
   
• Denial of state habeas corpus affirmed by Rhines v. Weber, 608 N.W.2d 303 (S.D. 2000).
   
• Conviction and sentence affirmed on direct appeal by State v. Rhines, 548 N.W.2d 415 (S.D.), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 1013 (1996).

Significant legal issues:

• South Dakota Supreme Court's affirmance of Mr. Rhines' death sentence despite its holding that the "depravity of mind" aggravating circumstance is unconstitutional
   
• adequacy of trial counsels' investigation and presentation of mitigating evidence
   
• adequacy of Miranda warnings given to Mr. Rhines before his incriminating statements to police
   
• permissibility of district court's stay of habeas petition so that unexhausted claims may be exhausted in state court

Return to casetracker list