Joe FORREST, Petitioner-Appellee, v. Daniel B. VASQUEZ, Warden; Daniel E. Lungren, Attorney General, Respondents-Appellants

Good Law
75 F.3d 562·1996 WL 47100·1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 1614·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 847
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 7, 199695-55919California1,116 words

Opinion

Opinion

Farris, J.

The government appeals the district court’s order granting Joe Forrest a writ of habeas corpus. We reverse.

BACKGROUND

Following a pro per trial, Forrest was convicted in Los Angeles County of attempted murder, use of a deadly and dangerous weapon, and intentional infliction of great bodily injury.

Forrest appealed his conviction to the California Court of Appeal, claiming, among other things, that he had been denied access to a law library and legal materials. On October 25, 1993, the Court of Appeal affirmed his conviction.

Under Rule 28(b) of the California Rules of Court, a petition for review to the California Supreme Court must be filed within 10 days after the Court of Appeal decision becomes final. Forrest failed to file a timely petition for review, and on December 28, 1993, the California Supreme Court denied his application for relief from default.

Forrest later filed a petition for habeas corpus in the California Supreme Court, again alleging that his constitutional rights had been violated by the denial of access to a law library. The Court’s denial of the petition read: “Petition for writ of habeas corpus DENIED. (See In re Waltreus (1965) 62 Cal.2d 218, 225 [,…

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.