Ernest R. Roybal v. B.J. Bunnell, Superintendent Attorney General of the State of California

955 F.2d 48 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Ernest R. ROYBAL, Petitioner-Appellant, v. B.J. BUNNELL, Superintendent; Attorney General of the State of California, Respondents-Appellees. No. 90-55200. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Feb. 3, 1992. * Decided Feb. 20, 1992. Before TANG, KOZINSKI and TROTT, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Ernest R. Roybal, a California state prisoner, appeals the dismissal of his petition for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 . Roybal contends that his sentence was imposed in violation of the Constitution's proscription against state ex post facto laws. He further argues that an evidentiary hearing is necessary to determine the effect of stayed sentence enhancements alleged to be ex post facto. We affirm. 3 * Under California's sentencing scheme, there is a five-year cap on the aggregate term of consecutive sentences imposed for counts of conviction subordinate to the…