Parle v. Runnels
This text of 177 F. App'x 759 (Parle v. Runnels) 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
MEMORANDUM
The district court’s review de novo of the decision of the California Court of [760]*760Appeal was in error: that court, however imperfectly, conducted cumulative error review of the trial. In the light of the district court’s familiarity with the case, we remand for the district court to determine whether the decision of the state court was an objectively unreasonable application of Chambers v. Mississippi, 410 U.S. 284, 93 S.Ct. 1038, 35 L.Ed.2d 297 (1973), Taylor v. Kentucky, 436 U.S. 478, 98 S.Ct. 1930, 56 L.Ed.2d 468 (1978), or other relevant Supreme Court precedent.
VACATED and REMANDED.
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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
177 F. App'x 759, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/parle-v-runnels-ca9-2006.