October 10, 2007 Ninth Circuit Decisions
On Wednesday,, October 10, 2007, the Ninth Circuit issued four published opinions.
In U.S v. Vidal, the Ninth Circuit held that a prior conviction for a violation of section 10851 (8) does not qualify as an aggravated felony within the meaning of you asked U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2 (b) (1) (C) USC § 1101 (a) (43) (G). A conviction under this section is not necessarily satisfy all the elements of a generic theft offense, because it applies not only to principals and accomplices but also too accessories. Here, the record does not establish that the defendant admitted to all the elements of the generic theft. The court remanded for resentencing.
In Martinez-Merino v. Keisler, the Ninth Circuit denied habeas review, where there were no allegations that raise a constitutional infirmity in the alien’s removal order.
In Tollis Inc. v. County Of San Diego, the Ninth Circuit upheld an ordinance in San Diego County opposing restrictions upon adult entertainment venues. However, the Court reversed the trial court's severance of a provision that allowed local governments more than 100 days to act upon a permitting application. The severance of that unreasonably long time period from the statute resulted in no time limit at all. The Ninth Circuit struck all provisions from the ordinance dependence upon the permitting requirements.
In Parle v. Runnels, the Ninth Circuit upheld the grant of habeas relief, finding California courts to have been unreasonable in finding that the numerous errors did not cumulatively result in an unfair or prejudicial trial. Here, the errors included violation of the patient psychologist privilege; exclusion of relevant rebuttal evidence, evidence of the victim’s propensity toward violence, and his testimony of the defendant’ s demeanor after the crime; and improper admission of character evidence.
