Louis

Louis v. Boening

Good Law
312 F. App'x 996
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 25, 2009No. 07-35941California841 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Joe Louis appeals the district court’s denial of his petition for habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 , following his conviction by a Washington state jury. We consider only the issue certified for appeal by the district court — whether Louis’ convictions for first degree kidnapping and first degree robbery violate the Fifth Amendment’s Double Jeopardy Clause— and decline to expand the district court’s certificate of appealability to include the uncertified issue raised in Louis’ opening brief. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm.

1. The test to determine whether the punishment of a single course of conduct under two separate statutes violates double jeopardy “ ‘is whether each provision requires proof of a fact which the other does not.’ ” Missouri v. Hunter, 459 U.S. 359, 366 , 103 S.Ct. 673 , 74 L.Ed.2d 535 (1983) (quoting Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299, 304 , 52 S.Ct. 180 , 76 L.Ed. 306 (1932)) (emphasis added). The Washington Supreme Court concluded Louis’ convictions did not violate double jeopardy, because “in order to prove robbery, the State is required to prove a taking of personal property, which is not an element of…

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.