Brazil v. Carey

Ninth Circuit

Brazil v. Carey

234 F. App'x 569

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedJune 13, 2007

DocketNo. 05-17372

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 234 F. App'x 569 (Brazil v. Carey) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Brazil v. Carey, 234 F. App'x 569 (9th Cir. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

**

California state prisoner Davon D. Brazil appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. We have jurisdiction pursuant to [570]*57028 U.S.C. § 2253. We review de novo, McQuillion v. Duncan, 306 F.3d 895, 899 (9th Cir.2002), and we affirm.

Brazil contends that the California Department of Corrections’ (“CDC”) categorization of him as a “life prisoner” demonstrates that the CDC impermissibly increased the 15-years-to-life sentence imposed by the trial court. We reject this contention because there is no evidence that Brazil’s sentence has changed and because the term “life prisoner” specifically applies to a prisoner who, like Brazil, is serving a 15-years-to-life indeterminate term following a conviction for second degree murder. See Cal.Code Regs. tit. 15, § 2000(b)(3); see also Bennett v. California, 406 F.2d 36, 38 (9th Cir.1969) (stating that the constitutionality of indeterminate sentence laws like California’s and of the delegation of the power to fix and refix terms and grant and revoke parole is well-established).

We also reject Brazil’s contention that the CDC failed to apply earned sentence reduction credits as belied by the record.

All pending motions are denied.

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

MEMORANDUM

**

California state prisoner Davon D. Brazil appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. We have jurisdiction pursuant to [570]*57028 U.S.C. § 2253. We review de novo, McQuillion v. Duncan, 306 F.3d 895, 899 (9th Cir.2002), and we affirm.

Brazil contends that the California Department of Corrections’ (“CDC”) categorization of him as a “life prisoner” demonstrates that the CDC impermissibly increased the 15-years-to-life sentence imposed by the trial court. We reject this contention because there is no evidence that Brazil’s sentence has changed and because the term “life prisoner” specifically applies to a prisoner who, like Brazil, is serving a 15-years-to-life indeterminate term following a conviction for second degree murder. See Cal.Code Regs. tit. 15, § 2000(b)(3); see also Bennett v. California, 406 F.2d 36, 38 (9th Cir.1969) (stating that the constitutionality of indeterminate sentence laws like California’s and of the delegation of the power to fix and refix terms and grant and revoke parole is well-established).

We also reject Brazil’s contention that the CDC failed to apply earned sentence reduction credits as belied by the record.

All pending motions are denied.

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

234 F. App'x 569, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brazil-v-carey-ca9-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack