Silvernail

Silvernail v. Armstrong

Good Law
83 F. App'x 170
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 8, 2003No. 00-35958; D.C. No. CV-99-00474-HRHCalifornia465 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Petitioner Reginald Lee Silvernail timely appeals from the district court’s denial of his petition for habeas corpus. We affirm.

Petitioner was indicted for first-degree murder, kidnapping, and first-degree assault. At his first trial, the jury also was instructed (without objection) on lesser-included offenses, including second-degree murder. The jury found Petitioner guilty of kidnapping and second-degree murder, but acquitted him of assault and first-degree murder.

On direct appeal after the first trial, Petitioner secured a reversal due to evi-dentiary error. He was retried for kidnapping and second-degree murder and convicted of both. This time, the state courts upheld the convictions. In this ha-beas context, our review is limited to that specified in 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d).

Neither principles of double jeopardy nor principles of collateral estoppel precluded the second trial or the second convictions for the crimes on which the state secured convictions in the first trial. See United States v. Powell, 469 U.S. 57 , 105 S.Ct. 471 , 83 L.Ed.2d 461 (1984) (discussing double jeopardy principles); Justices of Boston Mun. Court v. Lydon, 466 U.S. 294 , 104 S.Ct.…

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.