From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mayle v. Brown

U.S.
Mar 10, 2003
538 U.S. 901 (2003)
Download
PDF
Check
Treatment

Summary

finding a petitioner's claim that he should be resentenced in light of Romero was not cognizable on federal habeas review

Summary of this case from Fields v. Cal. Dep't of Corr. & Rehab.
See 3 Summaries

Opinion

CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT.

No. 01-1487.

March 10, 2003.

C.A. 9th Cir. Motion of respondents for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari granted, judgment vacated, and case remanded for further consideration in light of Lockyer v. Andrade, ante, p. 63. Reported below: 283 F. 3d 1019.

Summaries of

Mayle v. Brown

U.S.
Mar 10, 2003
538 U.S. 901 (2003)

finding a petitioner's claim that he should be resentenced in light of Romero was not cognizable on federal habeas review

Summary of this case from Fields v. Cal. Dep't of Corr. & Rehab.

finding not cognizable on federal habeas review a claim of error in declining to strike a prior conviction

Summary of this case from Pogue v. Swarthout

dismissing as not cognizable a claim that a petitioner should be resentenced after consideration of a motion to strike a prior conviction

Summary of this case from Colon v. Paramo
Case details for

Mayle v. Brown

Case Details

Full title:MAYLE, WARDEN, ET AL. v. BROWN ET AL

Court:U.S.

Date published: Mar 10, 2003

Citations

538 U.S. 901 (2003)

Citing Cases

Penton v. Kernan

More recently, the Ninth Circuit also held that "application of a sentencing enhancement law due to a prior…

Ward v. McDowell

To the extent Petitioner claims that the trial court erred under state law by using the wrong standard under…

37 Citing Cases