Andrew Cortez Crater v. George M. Galaza

Bad Law
491 F.3d 1119·2007 WL 1965122·2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 16182
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 9, 200705-17027California7,789 words

Opinion

Opinion

O'Scannlain, J.

We are asked, once again, whether the Anti-terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act is unconstitutional, this time by another habeas corpus petitioner convicted of murder in a California state court.

I

On June 8, 1995, Andrew Cortez Crater and Thomas Crater Robinson went on an armed crime spree in Sacramento, California. In the course of a few hours, the two men robbed a college student, a man and his sister-in-law, and a group outside a café. During the third robbery, Robinson fatally shot James Pantages. The Sacramento community expressed sorrow and dismay. James Pantages had been a beloved local musician. Numerous news reports were written on the crime.

Crater and Robinson were tried for robbery, attempted robbery, and murder. The charges included a special circumstance allegation for murder committed during a robbery. The prosecutor pursued the death penalty only for Robinson. Crater sought a change of venue and severance of his trial from that of Robinson, and the judge granted the latter.

Tried first, Robinson was convicted on all counts. The jury hung with regard to the death penalty, and the prosecutor did not pursue it further. Before Crater’s trial began, 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.