Legal Opinion
Nitschke v. BELLEQUE
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided May 24, 2012No. 10-36121PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
PAEZ, Circuit Judge:
In this appeal from the denial of habeas relief, we address whether Petitioner Michael Nitschke’s Apprendi claim is procedurally defaulted under Oregon’s preservation rule. See Or. R.App. P. 5.45(f). 1 Nitschke failed to raise at the state trial court level the Apprendi claim that forms the basis of his challenge to his enhanced sentence under Oregon’s “dangerous of fender” law. Although Nitschke raised the issue in his appeal to the Oregon Court of Appeals, that court declined to consider the merits of the claim because the issue had not been raised in the trial…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Coleman v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Martinez v. RyanSupreme Court of the United States · 2012
- Michigan v. LongSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Michael Smith v. Oregon Board of Parole and Post-Prison SupervisionCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2013
- (HC) Cooper v. CovelloDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2023
- Arellano v. SantosDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2020
- Duston Miller v. Attorney General of the State of Nevada, et al.District Court, D. Nevada · 2026
- Joseph v. ClaytonDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2020
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.