Edward Byron Ballard v. Wayne Estelle, Warden

Bad Law
91 Daily Journal DAR 7594·937 F.2d 453·1991 WL 110453·1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 13146·91 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4923
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 26, 199190-55901California3,078 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wiggins, J.

Edward Byron Ballard appeals the district court’s dismissal of his habeas corpus petition on the merits. He is incarcerated in California for armed robbery and argues that the definition of “use of a firearm” used to enhance his sentence was broader than the California sentencing laws require, thereby denying him due process. He also argues that even if the state court’s definition of firearm use was the correct one, there was sufficient evidence of use, according to the definition, in only two of the 18 robbery counts. This court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253 . We affirm.

BACKGROUND

Mr. Ballard was convicted of 18 counts of robbery, 3 counts of attempted robbery, and 1 count of assault with a deadly weapon. All counts stemmed from two bar robberies conducted with several accomplices on two different days. The jury found that Mr. Ballard had used a firearm in each count. Consequently, the judge enhanced his sentence once for each bar robbery under Cal.Penal Code § 12022.5, and classified each count as a violent felony for sentencing purposes under Cal. Penal Code § 667.5 (c)(8). The judge imposed consecutive prison sentences for each count under § 1170.1(a) for a total…

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.