Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

103 F.3d 827

Docket No. 95-99003.

Jeffries v. Wood

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

Argued and Submitted Nov. 20, 1996.

Decided Dec. 20, 1996.

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1996-12-20

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“not apply to cases filed in the federal courts of this Circuit prior to the Act's effective date of April 24, 1996.”

quoted by 3 later decisions, including Mitchell v. K.w. Prunty, 107 F.3d -247 - Mitchell v. Prunty

“) had seen Henry in her home near the site of the shooting immediately before the shooting, with a shotgun under his coat. Grim did not call James as a witness and, following trial, did not move for a new trial based on James' written declaration. STANDARD OF REVIEW 4 Because Wilson's petition was filed after the effective date of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (”

quoted by 1 later decision, including Jackie Wilson v. Ic Haunani Henry

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1996-12-20

How this case has been cited

Cited by 89 later decisions — most recently July 2018 · most notably Jeffries v. Wood (1997), Hall v. Washington (1997)

65 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

770199620002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Before: HUG, Chief Judge, GOODWIN, SCHROEDER, FLETCHER, REINHARDT, BRUNETTI, KOZINSKI, T.G. NELSON, HAWKINS, TASHIMA, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.

¶2On August 29, 1996, the Court directed the parties to submit briefs on the question of whether the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Pub.L. No. 104-132, 110 Stat. 1214 (“Act”) applied to cases filed prior to the Act’s effective date. This issue has been fully briefed and was submitted on oral argument on November 20, 1996.

¶3A number of Ninth Circuit panels have stayed decisions pending resolution of this question. Accordingly, we have elected to announce our decision prior to issuing an opinion.

¶4We hold that the amendments to Chapter 153 of Title 28 of the United States Code contained in Title I of the Act do not apply to cases filed in the federal courts of this Circuit prior to the Act’s effective date of April 24, 1996. A full opinion detailing the rationale for our decision, along with a decision on the merits, will be forthcoming, together with any separate concurring or dissenting opinions which members of the en bane panel may wish to file.

¶5Judges GOODWIN, BRUNETTI and HAWKINS dissent from the issuance of this order.

/103/f3d/827 · .json · Public domain