Legal Opinion

Armando Ybarra v. M. Stainer

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided March 3, 2015No. 12-56901Unpublished

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM *

Armando Ybarra appeals the district court’s denial of his habeas corpus petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Ybarra’s petition challenges the use of his 1998 conviction of dissuading a witness, in violation of California Penal Code § 136.1, as a strike prior for purposes of California’s three strikes law, CalPenal Code §§ 667(b)-(i), 1170.12. Ybarra argues that his 1998 plea agreement provided that the two offenses to which he was pleading guilty could not be charged as strike priors at any time in the future notwithstanding any changes in the law. We have jurisdiction under 28…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Ricketts v. AdamsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  2. Brian A. Buckley v. C.A. Terhune, Director of the California Department of CorrectionsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
  3. Ricketts v. AdamsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  4. People v. SheltonCalifornia Supreme Court · 2006
  5. Doe v. HarrisCalifornia Supreme Court · 2013

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API