From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sanchez v. Vargo

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Mar 18, 2015
597 F. App'x 201 (4th Cir. 2015)

Opinion

No. 14-6619

03-18-2015

DAVID JOSEPH SANCHEZ, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, v. MARIE VARGO, Warden, Sussex II State Prison, Respondent - Appellee.

Carolyn M. Sweeney, Joshua C. Toll, Sara A. Silverstein, Samuel E. Doran, Stephen D. Saltarelli, KING & SPALDING LLP, Washington, D.C., for Appellant. Mark R. Herring, Attorney General, Victoria Johnson, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.


UNPUBLISHED Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, Senior District Judge. (3:13-cv-00400-REP) Before WILKINSON and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Carolyn M. Sweeney, Joshua C. Toll, Sara A. Silverstein, Samuel E. Doran, Stephen D. Saltarelli, KING & SPALDING LLP, Washington, D.C., for Appellant. Mark R. Herring, Attorney General, Victoria Johnson, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

David Sanchez, Jr., appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. Sanchez was convicted in 1999 of capital murder and related offenses and is serving a sentence of life plus eighteen years without the possibility of parole. The sole issue raised in this appeal is whether Sanchez is entitled to retroactive application of Miller v. Alabama, 132 S. Ct. 2455 (2012). In Miller, the Supreme Court held that the Eighth Amendment prohibits a mandatory sentence of life without parole for an offender who was under the age of eighteen at the time of the offense. Id. at 2461. Sanchez was seventeen when he committed the relevant crimes.

This case is governed by our recent decision in Johnson v. Ponton, ___ F.3d ___, 2015 WL 924049 (4th Cir. 2015). In Johnson, we held "that the Miller rule is not retroactively applicable to cases on collateral review." Id. at *1. In light of Miller, we affirm the denial of Sanchez's § 2254 petition. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED


Summaries of

Sanchez v. Vargo

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Mar 18, 2015
597 F. App'x 201 (4th Cir. 2015)
Case details for

Sanchez v. Vargo

Case Details

Full title:DAVID JOSEPH SANCHEZ, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, v. MARIE VARGO, Warden…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Mar 18, 2015

Citations

597 F. App'x 201 (4th Cir. 2015)