Gardner

MEMORANDUM **

Keith James Gardner appeals the district court’s denial of his petition for habeas corpus, which challenges his sentence pursuant to California’s Three Strikes law, CaLPenal Code § 667(b)-(i), for a year 2000 burglary conviction. We reject Gardner’s argument that the terms of his plea agreements for his three prior convictions precluded the State from enhancing his sentence for any future convictions by more than five years each, and we therefore affirm the district court.

Under California law, plea bargains are interpreted according to contract law principles, Cal. Civ.Code § 1635; Buckley v. Terhune, 441 F.3d 688, 695 (9th Cir.2006) (en banc), and “are deemed to incorporate and contemplate not only the existing law but the reserve power of the state to amend the law or enact additional laws,” People v. Gipson, 117 Cal.App.4th 1065, 1070 , 12 Cal.Rptr.3d 478 (2004) (internal *883 quotation marks omitted). None of Gardner’s plea agreements contains an express term limiting the State’s power to use his convictions for future sentencing enhancements. Moreover, nothing in the record suggests that Gardner, much less the State, understood the plea agreements to limit…