Sasak

Sasak v. Copeland

Good Law
46 F. App'x 429
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 29, 2002No. 01-16843; D.C. No. CV-95-02181-RCBCalifornia940 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Timothy Sasak, a former prisoner of the State of Arizona, appeals the district court’s decision denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for habeas corpus relief. Because Sasak filed his federal habeas corpus petition in 1995, the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act does not apply to the merits of this case. See Jeffries v. Wood, 103 F.3d 827, 827 (9th Cir. 1996) (en banc). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 and 2253. 1 Review *430 ing the district court’s decision de novo, we affirm. See Calderon v. Prunty, 59 F.3d 1005, 1008 (9th Cir.1995) (stating that a district court’s decision denying a petition for habeas corpus relief is reviewed de novo). Given the parties’ familiarity with the facts and procedural history of this case, we do not recount them here except as necessary to explain our decision.

The Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment protects against multiple criminal punishments for the same offense. See Hudson v. United States, 522 U.S. 93, 99 , 118 S.Ct. 488 , 139 L.Ed.2d 450 (1997); United States v. Halper, 490 U.S. 435, 440 , 109 S.Ct. 1892 , 104 L.Ed.2d 487 (1989). Sasak claims that he was denied this protection when the…

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.