Collins

Collins v. Pliler

Good Law
61 F. App'x 479
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 18, 2003No. 00-57167; D.C. No. CV-99-02559-MMMCalifornia391 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

California state prisoner Alonzo Lonnie Collins appeals the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition challenging his sentence for petty theft with a prior felony conviction in violation of California Penal Code § 666. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 , and we affirm.

Collins contends that his 25 year to life sentence under California’s three strikes law, Cal.Penal Code Ann. § 667 (West 1999), is cruel and unusual punishment, in violation of the Eighth Amendment. This claim is foreclosed by the Supreme Court’s recent decisions in Lockyer v. Andrade, — U.S. -, 123 S.Ct. 1166, 1175-76 , 155 L.Ed.2d 144 (2003) (“affirmance of two consecutive 25 years to life sentences for petty theft was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law”), and Ewing v. California, — U.S. -, 123 S.Ct. 1179, 1190-91 , 155 L.Ed.2d 108 (2003) (holding that petitioner’s 25 years to life sentence under the California three strikes law did not violate the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment).

Accordingly, the state court’s denial of Collins’ habeas petition was not an unreasonable application of…

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.