Can the U.S. District Court, after first finding the Federal Petition does in fact allege federal constitutional claims, summarily dismiss the Federal Petition by giving a collateral estoppel effect to the state court decision of FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM without violating the holdings in Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 (1972) and Allen v. McCurry, 449 U.S. 90 (1980)?

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED i . The Petitioner first filed a state court declaratory judgment action claiming . ‘that the state Parole Board had (1) made an ex post facto change to parole suitability standards and (2) that new parole procedures, implemented after the decision in Greenholtz v. Inmates, 442 U.S. 1 (1976), violated Due Process. The state courts summarily dismissed these claims for FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM for which relief can be granted. The Petitioner then filed an action under 42 U.S.c. §1983 in the U.S. District Court making the same federal constitutional claims. : QUESTION: Can the U.S. District Court, after first finding the Federal Petition does in fact allege federal constitutional claims, summarily dismiss the Federal Petition by giving a collateral estoppel effect to the state court decision of FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM without violating the holdings in Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 (1972) and Allen v. McCurry, 449 U.S. 90 (1980)? ib is