Legal Opinion
Andre Boston v. E. Roe, Attorney General of the State of California
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided September 3, 1997No. 96-56091Unpublished
1Opinion of the Court
122 F.3d 1069
NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.
Andre BOSTON, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
E. ROE, Attorney General of the State of California,
Respondents-Appellees.
No. 96-56091.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Aug. 25, 1997.**
Decided Sept. 3, 1997.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Audrey B. Collins,…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Hill v. LockhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Tollett v. HendersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Vernon C. Weygandt v. Donald Look, Superintendent, and the Attorney General for the State of WashingtonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1983
- Dominick Cacoperdo v. Peter Demosthenes the Attorney General of the State of NevadaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1994
- Richard Allan Moran v. Salvador Godinez, WardenCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1995
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.