Mosby

Mosby v. Solis

Good Law
243 F. App'x 246
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 5, 2007No. 06-55293California868 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Petitioner-Appellant Vincent Mosby appeals the district court’s denial of his petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 , and we affirm.

In Irons v. Carey, we recognized under California law that the California Board of Parole Hearing’s (“the Board”) inquiry under California Penal Code § 3041 primarily turns on a discretionary consideration of a petitioner’s unsuitability for parole as a public safety risk. See 479 F.3d 658, 662 (9th Cir.2007) (“Although the Board must ‘normally set a parole release date’ before the minimum term has been served, an inmate ‘shall be found unsuitable for parole and denied parole if, in the judgment of the [Board,] the prisoner will pose an unreasonable risk of danger to society if released from prison.’” (quoting In re Dannenberg, 34 Cal.4th 1061, 1078, 1080 , 23 Cal.Rptr.3d 417 , 104 P.3d 783 (2005) (alteration in original))). In tacit rejection of Mosby’s purported presumption in favor of setting a parole release date at one’s first parole hearing, we further recognized that the Board’s unsuitability finding under § 3401(b) “ ‘must precede any effort to *248 set a parole release date’ ” under 3041(a). See id. at 662…

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.