Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

501 F.3d 1147

Docket No. 00-99011.

Landrigan v. Schriro

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

Decided Sept. 4, 2007.

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 2007-09-04

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently April 2017

2 district ·

2 counsel of record

Relies on Schriro v. Landrigan · Jeffrey Timothy Landrigan v. Terry Stewart Director Arizona Department of Corrections · Landrigan v. Schriro

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2007-09-04

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Dale A. Baich, Esq., Federal Public Defenders Office, Phoenix, AZ, for Petitioner-Appellant.

¶2Kent E. Cattani, Esq., Office of the Attorney General Civil Division, Phoenix, AZ, for Respondent-Appellee.

¶3Before: MARY M. SCHROEDER, Chief Judge, HARRY PREGERSON, STEPHEN REINHARDT, ALEX KOZINSKI, MICHAEL DALY HAWKINS, KIM McLANE WARDLAW, W. FLETCHER, MARSHA S. BERZON, RICHARD R. CLIFTON, CONSUELO M. CALLAHAN and CARLOS T. BEA, Circuit Judges.

¶4ORDER

¶5The mandate, issued on May 8, 2006, is recalled. In light of the Supreme Court’s mandate, issued on July 30, 2007, in Schriro v. Landrigan, — U.S. -, 127 S.Ct. 1933, 167 L.Ed.2d 836 (2007), we vacate our en banc decision, Landrigan v. Schriro, 441 F.3d 638 (9th Cir.2006), and affirm the district court’s denial of an evidentiary hearing on Landrigan’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. We again adopt the three-judge panel’s holdings with respect to the additional sentencing issues raised on appeal, Landrigan v. Stewart, 272 F.3d 1221, 1229-31 (9th Cir.2001). Therefore, the district court’s denial of Landrigan’s petition for writ of habeas corpus is AFFIRMED.

/501/f3d/1147 · .json · Public domain