Legal Opinion
Raymond E. Hill v. State of Alaska
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided July 19, 2002No. 01-71735PublishedCited by 54 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
McKEOWN, Circuit Judge.
This appeal requires us to decide whether an initial habeas petition challenging the calculation of the prisoner’s release date, in this case a claim that Alaska’s “mandatory parole” scheme is unconstitutional, is governed by the “second or successive” petition provision of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA). See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b). Raymond Hill has filed numerous habeas petitions since he was convicted of robbery in 1993. He now requests this court’s permission to file yet another habeas petition in district court. Because the petition…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Slack v. McDanielSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- McCleskey v. ZantSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Ford v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Felker v. TurpinSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Stewart v. Martinez-VillarealSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by54 opinions
- Joel White v. John Lambert, SuperintendentCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
- Daniel Clark Medberry v. James CrosbyCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2003
- Clarence Ray Allen v. Steven W. Ornoski, Warden, of the California State Prison at San Quentin Attorney General of the State of CaliforniaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
- Robert Benchoff v. Raymond ColleranCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2005
- Gregory L. Brown v. W. MunizCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2018
49 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.