Darrell Anthony Gautt v. Gail Lewis, Warden

Good Law
489 F.3d 993·2007 WL 1615123·2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 13018
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 6, 200703-55534California10,847 words

Opinion

Opinion

Berzon, J.

We consider whether Darrell Anthony Gautt’s constitutional due process right to be informed of the charges against him was violated when he was charged with a sentencing enhancement under one statute, section 12022.53(b) of the California Penal Code, but had his sentence enhanced under a second, different statute, section 12022.53(d). The first statute, not the second, was alleged by number and by nearly verbatim description in the information. We hold that Gautt’s due process right was indeed violated when, as a result of this discrepancy, he was sentenced pursuant to a twenty-five-year-to-life enhancement, rather than a ten-year enhancement, and that the California appellate court’s decision to the contrary constituted “an unreasonable application of [ ] clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d). We therefore reverse the district court’s denial of Gautt’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus. On remand, the district court shall grant a conditional writ of habeas corpus, ordering that the state release Gautt unless it re-sentences him.

I

The barebones facts of Gautt’s crime are that on January 10, 1998, Gautt…

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.