Opinion
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 36-3)
Kenneth Wrobleski, Imperial, CA, pro se.
Attorney General, Office of the California Attorney General, San Diego, CA, for Respondents-Appellees. D.C. No. CV-03-01113-JNK.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California, Judith N. Keep, District Judge, Presiding.
Before: KLEINFELD, TASHIMA and GOULD, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Kenneth Wrobleski appeals the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm.
Wrobleski contends that his 27-years-to-life sentence for petty theft with a prior violates the Eighth Amendment's prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment. His claim is foreclosed by Lockyer v. Andrade, 538 U.S. 63, 123 S.Ct. 1166, 1172-75, 155 L.Ed.2d 144 (2003) (holding that a California state court's affirmance of two consecutive 25-years-to-life sentences for petty theft was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law), and Ewing v. California, 538 U.S. 11, 123 S.Ct. 1179, 1185-90, 155 L.Ed.2d 108 (2003) (holding that a 25-years-to-life sentence under California's three strikes law did not violate the Eighth Amendment's prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment).
AFFIRMED.