Adrian Reyes v. Greg Lewis

FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ADRIAN REYES, No. 12-56650 Petitioner-Appellant, D.C. No. v. 5:12-cv-00691-GAF-E

GREG LEWIS, Warden, Respondent-Appellee. OPINION

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Gary A. Feess, District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted November 19, 2014—Pasadena, California

Filed August 14, 2015

Before: William A. Fletcher and Jay S. Bybee, Circuit Judges, and James K. Singleton, Senior District Judge.*

Opinion by Judge W. Fletcher; Concurrence by Judge Singleton

* The Honorable James K. Singleton, Senior District Judge for the U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska, sitting by designation. SUMMARY**

Habeas Corpus

The panel reversed the district court’s denial of a habeas corpus petition alleging that petitioner’s state-court conviction rested on a confession obtained in violation of Missouri v. Seibert, 542 U.S. 600 (2004).

The panel held that for the purpose of review under the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, Justice Kennedy’s…

Opinion by Judge W. FLETCHER; Concurrence by Judge SINGLETON.

OPINION

Petitioner Adrian Reyes petitions for a-writ of habeas corpus on the ground, inter alia, that his state-court conviction rested on a confession obtained in violation of Missouri v. Seibert, 542 U.S. 600 , 124 S.Ct. 2601 , 159 L.Ed.2d 643 (2004). For the reasons that follow, we reverse the district court and remand with instructions to grant the writ.

*818 I. Factual Background

On January 11, 2006, an armed person got out of a silver Toyota Camry and shot Derek Ochoa three times. The- person may have yelled “Delhi” (the name of an Orange County gang). Ochoa died as a result of the shooting. He was a senior at La Sierra High School in Riverside County-

Riverside Police Department officers traced the Camry to the home of Andres Munoz, an older cousin of petitioner Adrian Reyes. The car was registered to another member of the Munoz family, Albert. Reyes had recently moved to Riverside County from Orange County. He was a freshman at La Sierra. He was not quite two months past his fifteenth birthday.

The day before the shooting, Reyes had been walking home from school with a friend. A carload of gang members…

concurring:

The majority has joined in a thoughtful and thorough judgment in this case. I concur in that judgment. The majority has forcefully marshaled the facts and analyzed the applicable law. If this case had arisen entirely within the federal system, e.g., under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 , I would fully join in the opinion and have no further comments or suggestions.

This case does not arise entirely within the federal system, however, but comes to us from state court under § 2254, and thus our review must be guided by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA). AEDPA requires us to give deference to decisions of the state courts both as to the facts and the law, except in limited circumstances.

The majority identifies Missouri v. Seibert, 542 U.S. 600 , 124 S.Ct. 2601 , 159 L.Ed.2d 643 (2004), as clearly established federal law at the time the California Court of Appeal decided this case and looks to Justice Kennedy’s concurring opinion to provide the appropriate rule of decision. I agree. See United States v. Williams, 435 F.3d 1148, 1157-59 (9th Cir.2006) (analyzing Seibert and concluding that Justice Kennedy’s opinion is the narrowest holding obtaining…