| Case # | Name | Category | Court | Judge | Published |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
21-55515
|
U.S. v. Ovsepian
To excuse his procedural default, defendant convicted under divisible statute needed to demonstrate actual innocence only with respect to the prong under which he was actually tried and convicted. |
Criminal Law and Procedure, Prisoners' Rights |
|
K. Wardlaw | Sep. 4, 2024 |
|
A168677
|
Modification: In re Oliveras
Prisoner's use of electronic tablet to view pornographic images stored on removable SIM card was not computer fraud or abuse under the California Code of Regulations. |
Prisoners' Rights |
|
I. Petrou | Aug. 6, 2024 |
|
A168677
|
In re Oliveras
Prisoner's use of electronic tablet to view pornographic images stored on removable SIM card was not computer fraud or abuse under the California Code of Regulations. |
Prisoners' Rights |
|
I. Petrou | Jul. 17, 2024 |
|
22-15302
|
Nielsen v. Thornell
Order |
Prisoners' Rights |
|
Jul. 9, 2024 | |
|
23-2270
|
Walter Betschart v. State of Oregon
*Younger* federal abstention was inappropriate where the state of Oregon was failing to provide counsel for indigent criminal defendants. |
Prisoners' Rights |
|
J. Owens | Jun. 3, 2024 |
|
22-15302
|
Nielsen v. Thornell
Arizona inmates did not have a protected liberty interest in avoiding private prisons because they did not impose an "atypical or significant hardship" beyond ordinary prison conditions. |
Prisoners' Rights, Constitutional Law |
|
K. Lee | May 22, 2024 |
|
S277120
|
Ruelas v. County of Alameda
Nonconvicted incarcerated individuals providing labor for a for-profit private company to supply meals within a county jail do not have a claim for minimum and overtime wages. |
Prisoners' Rights, Employment Law |
|
K. Evans | Apr. 23, 2024 |
|
19-99001
|
Lewis v. Andes
District Court properly denied habeas petition, where California Supreme Court had applied the proper standards for assessing whether defendant's juvenile confession was voluntary. |
Prisoners' Rights |
|
M. Christen | Mar. 13, 2024 |
|
24-275
|
Creech v. Richardson
Death row inmate's third habeas petition was properly dismissed as violating rule against successive petition given because his claim had been ripe and could have made in his prior petition. |
Prisoners' Rights |
|
P. Curiam | Feb. 27, 2024 |
|
16-99000
|
Sherman v. Gittere
Nevada Supreme Court's denial of defendant's right-to-present-a-complete-defense claim was not erroneous under AEDPA's deferential standard of review. |
Prisoners' Rights |
|
P. Bumatay | Feb. 12, 2024 |
|
22-15997
|
Long v. Sugai
Delivering evening meal four hours before prisoner could break religion-based fast was a substantial burden on the prisoner's free exercise that should have been analyzed for a legitimate penological interest. |
Prisoners' Rights |
|
W. Fletcher | Feb. 6, 2024 |
|
22-35218
|
Maney v. Brown
The Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act extends immunity to persons who make policy-level decisions regarding the administration or use of COVID countermeasures. |
Prisoners' Rights |
|
J. Sung | Feb. 2, 2024 |
|
22-35327
|
Hebrard v. Nofziger
District court did not err when it sua sponte resurrected defendant's forfeited Heck defense and dismissed the complaint under the Prison Litigation Reform Act. |
Prisoners' Rights |
|
C. Bea | Jan. 12, 2024 |
|
C098247
|
In re Banks
Disciplinary finding that inmate engaged in conspiracy to introduce drugs into prison via the mail was unsupported as there was no evidence the inmate had made any agreement with the sender. |
Prisoners' Rights |
|
S. Mesiwala | Nov. 28, 2023 |
|
21-55464
|
Redd v. Guerrero
Indigent prisoner sentenced to death in California had a state-created property interest in expeditious state-appointed habeas counsel that was violated by a 26-year delay in appointment. |
Prisoners' Rights |
|
M. Berzon | Oct. 23, 2023 |
|
21-99008
|
Clark v. Broomfield
California Supreme Court's denial of habeas relief was not contrary to established law where defendant's request for self-representation was impulsive and not unequivocal. |
Prisoners' Rights |
|
S. Thomas | Oct. 11, 2023 |
|
22-15481
|
Hampton v. State of California
Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act immunity did not apply to defendant prison and its officials against claims arising from failing to administer COVID-19 tests. |
Prisoners' Rights |
|
M. Friedland | Oct. 4, 2023 |
|
23-48
|
Tong v. U.S.
Ineffective counsel habeas claims as to an earlier habeas petition were not a second or successive petition because defendant could not have raised them in the earlier petition. |
Prisoners' Rights |
|
M. Smith | Sep. 6, 2023 |
|
21-15839
|
Ashker v. Newsom
Settlement agreement's extension was improper when, compared to general population, special unit's confinement conditions were not atypical, imposing substantial hardship. |
Prisoners' Rights |
|
R. Nelson | Aug. 25, 2023 |
|
21-15044
|
Nasby v. State of Nevada
Prisoner lacked standing to pursue his access-to-courts claim where he could not show an actual injury because his allegedly hindered claim was frivolous. |
Prisoners' Rights |
|
R. Nelson | Aug. 21, 2023 |
|
20-55004
|
Chambers v. Herrera
Prisoner-plaintiff failed to state a claim where his failure to protect and retaliation claims were new contexts to which the implied Bivens cause of action had never been extended. |
Prisoners' Rights |
|
R. Nelson | Aug. 16, 2023 |
|
21-15073
|
Tiedemann v. Blanckense
Prisoner's transfer did not moot complaint challenging the Bureau of Prison's phone time cap where the alleged injury was caused by system-wide policy and a named defendant could provide relief. |
Prisoners' Rights |
|
J. Rakoff | Jul. 5, 2023 |
|
21-857
|
Jones v. Hendrix
The savings clause of 18 U.S.C. Section 2255 does not allow a prisoner to file a successive Section 2241 habeas corpus petition based on new interpretation of a criminal statute. |
Prisoners' Rights |
|
C. Thomas | Jun. 23, 2023 |
|
21-55175
|
Pinson v. Carvajal
Prisoner's habeas corpus petition based on prison officials' failure to protect against COVID-19 adequately did not properly sound in habeas because it challenged the conditions of the prisoner's confinement. |
Prisoners' Rights |
|
B. Bade | Jun. 9, 2023 |
|
21-15616
|
Eldridge v. Howard
Because D.C. Superior Court is not a "State court," for the purposes of 28 U.S.C. Section 2253(c)(1), petitioner did not need to obtain a certificate of appealability to appeal the district court's denial of his most recent habeas petition. |
Prisoners' Rights |
|
K. Schreier | Jun. 5, 2023 |
|
20-17332
|
Galanti v. Nevada Dept. of Corrections
District court erred in ignoring former Nevada prisoner's due process rights violation when the Department of Corrections failed to apply education credits that would have reduced his maximum sentence. |
Prisoners' Rights |
|
M. Smith | Apr. 26, 2023 |
|
20-16921
|
Armstrong v. Newsom
District court's orders for remedial measures to resolve disability discrimination in California prisons survived scrutiny because the orders resolved specific shortcomings the court had previously attempted to address. |
Prisoners' Rights |
|
M. Friedland | Feb. 3, 2023 |
|
H049188
|
People v. Superior Court (Cortez)
Prisoner's small clandestine notes sent in an envelope to his attorney were not protected by the attorney-client privilege because the notes were unrelated to legal representation. |
Prisoners' Rights |
|
A. Grover | Jan. 17, 2023 |
|
21-35728
|
Eaton v. Blewett
Prisoner was entitled to appeal his grievance to federal court as his options to exhaust administrative remedies were effectively unavailable given the circumstances presented by the prison. |
Prisoners' Rights |
|
M. Hawkins | Oct. 13, 2022 |
|
21-15089
|
Amended Opinion: Al Saud v. Days
Denying prisoner's request to be housed only with other Muslims was the least restrictive means of avoiding equal protection liability that comes with classifying prisoners based on religious beliefs. |
Prisoners' Rights |
|
M. Smith | Oct. 12, 2022 |
For reprint rights or to purchase a copy of your Daily Journal photo, email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices or call 949-702-5390. To buy more copies, call 866-531-1492 or email subscribe@dailyjournal.com