LATEST SUMMARIES

CIVIL PROCEDURE, CIVIL RIGHTS, CLASS ACTIONS, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE, GOVERNMENT LAW, HEALTH LAW, REMEDIES
• Pierce v. County of Orange

CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE, HABEAS CORPUS
• Whaley v. Belleque

CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE, SENTENCING
• US v. Carty

IMMIGRATION LAW
• Huang v. Mukasey

LATEST SUMMARIES

CIVIL PROCEDURE, CIVIL RIGHTS, CLASS ACTIONS, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE, GOVERNMENT LAW, HEALTH LAW, REMEDIES
Pierce v. County of Orange, No. 05-55829, 05-55845
In a class action brought by pretrial detainees in Orange County's jail facilities raising numerous constitutional, federal, and state law claims, a judgment against plaintiffs is affirmed for the most part, but reversed in part where: 1) two Stewart orders, which secure inmates housed in administrative segregation some minimal access to religious services and exercise, may not be terminated; 2) the district court clearly erred in finding that such orders were unnecessary to correct a current and ongoing violation of a federal right; and 3) because of physical barriers that deny disabled inmates access to certain prison facilities, and because of disparate programs and services offered to disabled versus non-disabled inmates, the county is in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Read more...

CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE, HABEAS CORPUS
Whaley v. Belleque, No. 06-35759
Denial of a pro se habeas petition as procedurally barred is remanded for consideration on the merits where, under Russell v. Rolfs, 893 F.2d 1033, 1037 (9th Cir. 1990), the state was judicially estopped from making its argument for procedural default in federal court. Having argued in a state appeals court that petitioner's claims were moot, and, as a result having obtained a dismissal of his claims, the state could not now oppose his petition for relief on the theory that the claims were not moot, and that, therefore, he failed to exhaust an available state remedy. Read more...

CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE, SENTENCING
US v. Carty, No. 05-10200, 05-30120
The circuit court declines to adopt an appellate "presumption" of reasonableness for sentences imposed within the Guidelines range, but it acknowledges that a correctly calculated Guidelines sentence will normally not be found unreasonable on appeal. (En banc opinion) Read more...

IMMIGRATION LAW
Huang v. Mukasey, No. 04-73309
Petition for review of an order dismissing Chinese petitioners' appeal from a denial of their application for asylum and related relief is granted in part and the matter remanded where the IJ failed to make a credibility finding, and the BIA compounded that error in approving such non-existent finding. Read more...