Legal Opinion
Brown v. Mayle
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided June 6, 2003No. 99-17261, 99-56197; D.C. No. CV-99-00241-WBS, CV-98-04672-R-BQRPublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM *
The United States Supreme Court vacated our opinion in 283 F.3d 1019 (9th *137Cir.2002), and remanded to this court for further proceedings. Mayle v. Brown, — U.S.-, 123 S.Ct. 1509, 155 L.Ed.2d 220 (2003).
1. In light of Lockyer v. Andrade, — U.S.-, 123 S.Ct. 1166, 155 L.Ed.2d 144 (2003), and Ewing v. California, — U.S. -, 123 S.Ct. 1179, 155 L.Ed.2d 108 (2003), we reject the petitioners’ challenges to California’s Three Strikes Law.
2. Bray raised only the Three Strikes issue. Brown raised three other issues. We address them in turn:(i) We affirm the district court’s holding that Brown…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Lockyer v. AndradeSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- People v. Superior Court (Romero)California Supreme Court · 1996
- Ewing v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- Theo Ervin Williams v. Robert Borg, WardenCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
- Dorina Mateyko, and Raymond Mateyko v. Thomas Felix, Michael Serafin, the City of Los AngelesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1991
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- In Re WhiteCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004
- Terence Tekoh v. County of Los AngelesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2024