Jerry Wallace Davis v. Manfred Maass, Superintendent, Oregon State Penitentiary

Ninth Circuit

Jerry Wallace Davis v. Manfred Maass, Superintendent, Oregon State Penitentiary

26 F.3d 130, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 21737, 1994 WL 250001

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedJune 9, 1994

Docket93-36053

StatusUnpublished

This text of 26 F.3d 130 (Jerry Wallace Davis v. Manfred Maass, Superintendent, Oregon State Penitentiary) 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

Jerry Wallace Davis v. Manfred Maass, Superintendent, Oregon State Penitentiary, 26 F.3d 130, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 21737, 1994 WL 250001 (9th Cir. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

26 F.3d 130

NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.
Jerry Wallace DAVIS, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
Manfred MAASS, Superintendent, Oregon State Penitentiary,
Respondent-Appellee.

No. 93-36053.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted May 24, 1994.*
Decided June 9, 1994.

Before: HUG, D.W. NELSON, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM**

Jerry W. Davis, an Oregon state prisoner, appeals the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 habeas corpus petition. We review de novo, Norris v. Risley, 878 F.2d 1178, 1180 (9th Cir.1989), and we affirm.

In 1990, following a jury trial, Davis was convicted of possession of a controlled substance and was sentenced to a five-year term of imprisonment. After exhausting state remedies, Davis filed his federal habeas petition, in which he claimed that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support his conviction.

In its order denying the habeas petition, the district court carefully reviewed the evidence against Davis. We agree with the district court's conclusion that the evidence was sufficient to support Davis's conviction. See Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 (1979) (conviction must be upheld if the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution, is sufficient to allow a rational jury to find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt). Accordingly, the district court correctly denied Davis's habeas petition.

AFFIRMED.

*

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed.R.App.P. 34(a); 9th Cir.R. 34-4

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3

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

26 F.3d 130

NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.
Jerry Wallace DAVIS, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
Manfred MAASS, Superintendent, Oregon State Penitentiary,
Respondent-Appellee.

No. 93-36053.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted May 24, 1994.*
Decided June 9, 1994.

Before: HUG, D.W. NELSON, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM**

Jerry W. Davis, an Oregon state prisoner, appeals the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 habeas corpus petition. We review de novo, Norris v. Risley, 878 F.2d 1178, 1180 (9th Cir.1989), and we affirm.

In 1990, following a jury trial, Davis was convicted of possession of a controlled substance and was sentenced to a five-year term of imprisonment. After exhausting state remedies, Davis filed his federal habeas petition, in which he claimed that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support his conviction.

In its order denying the habeas petition, the district court carefully reviewed the evidence against Davis. We agree with the district court's conclusion that the evidence was sufficient to support Davis's conviction. See Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 (1979) (conviction must be upheld if the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution, is sufficient to allow a rational jury to find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt). Accordingly, the district court correctly denied Davis's habeas petition.

AFFIRMED.

*

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed.R.App.P. 34(a); 9th Cir.R. 34-4

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

26 F.3d 130, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 21737, 1994 WL 250001, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jerry-wallace-davis-v-manfred-maass-superintendent-ca9-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack