Jerry Brizendine v. William A. Merkle, Warden at California Correction Center

45 F.3d 435 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Jerry BRIZENDINE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. William A. MERKLE, Warden at California Correction Center, Respondent-Appellee. No. 94-15786. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Oct. 21, 1994. * Decided Dec. 21, 1994. 1 Before: CHOY, SKOPIL, and FERGUSON, Circuit Judges 2 MEMORANDUM ** 3 Jerry Brizendine, a former California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 habeas petition challenging the sufficiency of the evidence to support his conviction for wilful tax evasion, Cal.Rev. & Tax Code Sec. 19406 (recodified as section 19706). We agree with petitioner that his appeal is not moot even though he has been released from custody. See Prantil v. California, 843 F.2d 314 , 316 n. 2 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 861 (1988). We disagree, however, with his argument that there is insufficient evidence to support his conviction. 4 Brizendine argues…