Haggard

Haggard v. Curry

Good Law
631 F.3d 931·2010 WL 4978842
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 9, 201010-16819California3,533 words

Opinion

Opinion

Steven G. Warner, Deputy Attorney General, Office of the California Attorney General, San Francisco, CA, for the appellant.

Steve M. Defilippis, Picone & Defilippis, San Jose, CA, for the appellee.

Before: RICHARD R. CLIFTON, JAY S. BYBEE and SANDRA S. IKUTA, Circuit Judges.

The panel has voted to deny the petitioner's motion for reconsideration en banc. Pursuant to General Order 6.11, the full court has been advised of the Motion for Reconsideration En Banc, and no judge has requested a vote on whether to rehear the matter en banc.

The Motion for Reconsideration En Banc is accordingly DENIED, and the court's Order of October 12, 2010 is AMENDED to appear as set forth below. No further motions for reconsideration or reconsideration en banc will be considered.

PER CURIAM.

In this case, the California Board of Parole Hearings ("Board") denied state prisoner Lewis Haggard's request for release on parole, and the state court upheld the parole denial. In his federal habeas petition, Haggard argued that the Board's decision was erroneous because the record lacked evidence of his current dangerousness. The district court agreed, and ordered the state to release Haggard while the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.