Clifford Hubbard v. United States
This text of Clifford Hubbard v. United States (Clifford Hubbard v. United States) 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.
Opinion
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS AUG 10 2021 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
CLIFFORD B. HUBBARD, No. 20-16094
Petitioner-Appellant, D.C. No. 1:19-mc-00333-LEK-KJM v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, MEMORANDUM*
Respondent-Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Hawaii Leslie E. Kobayashi, District Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submitted July 7, 2021 Honolulu, Hawaii
Before: NGUYEN, OWENS, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
In 1982, a general court-martial convicted U.S. Army Private Clifford
Hubbard of murder, attempted sodomy, and indecent acts with a child. Hubbard
was sentenced to life in prison and is currently serving his sentence at a state prison
in Florida. In 2019, Hubbard filed a petition for DNA testing under the Innocence
Protection Act of 2004 (“IPA”), 18 U.S.C. § 3600, in federal district court. In a
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. concurrently filed opinion, we affirm the dismissal of that petition for lack of
subject-matter jurisdiction.
Hubbard raises an additional argument on appeal—which he did not raise
before the district court—that the IPA violates the Equal Protection Clause by
discriminating against “military prisoners.” Hubbard does not contend that the
statute discriminates against a suspect class; rather, he argues only that the IPA
cannot withstand rational basis review. Applying that standard, we hold that
Hubbard has not met his burden to “negative every conceivable basis which might
support” the IPA—including, for example, giving special deference to military
courts. Dent v. Sessions, 900 F.3d 1075, 1082 (9th Cir. 2018) (quoting Hernandez-
Mancilla v. Holder, 633 F.3d 1182, 1185 (9th Cir. 2011)).
AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Clifford Hubbard v. United States, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/clifford-hubbard-v-united-states-ca9-2021.