Legal Opinion
Miguel Rosas v. James Nielsen
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided November 4, 2005No. 04-16039PublishedCited by 75 opinions
1Per curiam
Miguel Rosas petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 alleging that he was improperly denied parole and that he was denied due process and effective assistance of counsel at sentencing. The district court denied his petition and declined to issue a certificate of appealability. We affirm the district court’s denial of Rosas’s petition with respect to his first ground for relief, and we dismiss his appeal with respect to the second ground for lack of jurisdiction.
On November 2, 1990, Rosas pled no contest to the crime of second degree murder and was later sentenced to…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Slack v. McDanielSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Miller-El v. CockrellSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- California Department of Corrections v. MoralesSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- Willie Lee Miles v. K.W. Prunty, Warden Attorney General of the State of CaliforniaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999
- Donald Ray Patterson v. Terry L. StewartCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by75 opinions
- Hayward v. MarshallCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
- Wilson v. BellequeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
- Hayward v. MarshallCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
- Cooke v. SolisCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
- Hess v. BD. OF PAROLE AND POST-PRISON SUPERVISIONCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
70 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.