Acosta

Acosta v. Lynch

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaAugust 27, 20213:20-cv-02039California3,000 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

I. BACKGROUND

21 On February 3, 1993, a jury found Petitioner Jaime Acosta guilty of first-degree 22 murder and robbery with use of a firearm. (ECF No. 1 at 1-2). On June 25, 1993, Petitioner 23 was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. (Id. at 1). Petitioner 24 appealed and filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in the California Court of Appeal. 25 (ECF No. 5-2 at 3). On June 1, 1995, the court of appeal affirmed the conviction and 26 sentence and denied the petition for writ of habeas corpus. (Id.). On September 14, 1995, 27 the California Supreme Court affirmed the conviction and sentence. (ECF No. 1-2 at 2-3). 28 Petitioner filed a second petition for writ of habeas corpus in the California Court of Appeal, which was denied on February 26, 2003. (ECF No. 5-2 at 3). On October 12, 2018, Petitioner filed a third petition for writ of habeas corpus in the San Diego County Superior Court. (ECF No. 5-1 at 1). Petitioner asserted, in relevant part, that that there was insufficient evidence in his case to prove special circumstances based on two California Supreme Court decisions: People v. Banks, 61 Cal. 4th 788 (2015), and 7 …

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.