Hickman

Johnson v. Hickman

Good Law
184 F. App'x 666
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 16, 2006No. 04-17109California529 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

California state prisoner Lonnie Johnson appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition challenging his conviction by jury trial for possession of a controlled substance and 25-years-to-life sentence. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 . We review de novo the dismissal of a § 2254 petition, see Lott v. Mueller, 304 F.3d 918, 922 (9th Cir.2002), and affirm.

Johnson first contends that his sentence constitutes cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment. Given his criminal history, which includes five felony convictions for robbery and a prior prison term, Johnson’s sentence was not grossly disproportionate to his offense. See Lockyer v. Andrade, 538 U.S. 63, 73-78 , 123 S.Ct. 1166 , 155 L.Ed.2d 144 (2003); Ewing v. California, 538 U.S. 11, 28-31 , 123 S.Ct. 1179 , 155 L.Ed.2d 108 (2003). The state court’s decision therefore was not contrary to, and did not involve an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d)(1); Andrade, 538 U.S. at 77 , 123 S.Ct. 1166 .

Johnson next contends that the trial court abused its discretion when it declined to strike…

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.