Halcrombe

Halcrombe v. Hixon

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMarch 20, 20243:24-cv-00450California524 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

INTRODUCTION

Petitioner Laron Halcrombe seeks federal habeas relief from the state court’s denial of his petitions to be resentenced under Senate Bill 567. The petition for such relief is DISMISSED because such a claim is based on state law and therefore federal habeas relief is unavailable.

BACKGROUND

According to the petition, Halcrombe was convicted in the Alameda Superior Court of attempted murder and was, in 2021, sentenced to twenty-one years in state prison. (Pet., Dkt. No. 1 at 1.) In 2023, he petitioned the state courts for resentencing under Senate Bill 567, but he was denied relief. (Id. at 3-4.) Senate Bill 567, which became effective on January 1, 2022, amended California Penal Code section 1170, in relevant part, to provide: “When a judgment of imprisonment is to be imposed and the statute specifies three possible terms, the court shall, in its sound discretion, order imposition of a sentence not to exceed the middle term, except as otherwise provided in paragraph (2).” Malone v. Gastelo, No. CV 21- 04335 JLS (RAO), 2022 WL 14966301, at *5 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 30, 2022).

DISCUSSION

Violations of state law are not remediable on federal habeas review, even if…

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.