Milton

Milton v. Roe

Good Law
40 F. App'x 377
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 22, 2002No. 01-16489; D.C. No. CV-99-00326-MJJCalifornia505 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

We are asked to review the district court’s denial of Carl Ray Milton’s petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 . Milton was convicted under California law of 34 counts of forcible lewd and lascivious conduct with a child under the age of fourteen, and sentenced to 204 years in prison. We affirm in all respects. Because the parties are familiar with the facts and prior proceedings, we do not restate them unless necessary.

I. Due process claim

Milton argues that the trial court admitted into evidence a “tremendous amount of irrelevant and prejudicial testimony” regarding uncharged offenses, violating fundamental principles of due process and Milton’s right to a fair trial. We hold that the admission of the challenged evidence did not violate due process, for it permitted the jury to draw the inference that Milton’s physical and sexual domination of the household provided him with the opportunity to commit the charged offenses without detection for nearly four years. McKinney v. Rees, 993 F.2d 1378, 1384 (9th Cir.1993) (“[0]nly if there are no permissible inferences the jury may draw from the evidence can its admission violate due process.”)…

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.