Aguiar

Aguiar v. Terhune

Good Law
72 F. App'x 529
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 2, 2003No. 02-55158; D.C. No. CV-00-00532-VAPCalifornia894 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Petitioner Frank Aguiar was convicted of conspiracy to commit assault by means of great bodily force and second degree murder under the “natural and probable consequences” doctrine. Aguiar seeks habeas relief based upon the district court’s failure to instruct on the definition of assault; Aguiar also argues insufficient evidence existed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the murder of Roger Gonzalez was the natural and probable consequence of the assault in which Aguiar participated.

This Court reviews the district court’s denial of a 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition de novo. Lockhart v. Terhune, 250 F.3d 1223, 1228 (9th Cir.2001). Under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (“AEDPA”), habeas relief may be granted to a person in state custody only if the asserted constitutional error “resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d)(1); Early v. Packer, 537 U.S. 3, 123 S.Ct. 362, 364 , 154 L.Ed.2d 263 (2002). A person *531 may also be granted relief if the asserted constitutional error…

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.