Smithson v. Hunter
This text of 227 F. App'x 684 (Smithson v. Hunter) 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
California state hospital inmate Dustin L. Smithson appeals from the district court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition challenging his re-commitment as a sexually violent predator, pursuant to Cal. Welf. & Inst.Code § 6604. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253.
Reviewing de novo, Mendez v. Small, 298 F.3d 1154, 1157-58 (9th Cir.2002), we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.
To the extent Smithson raises uncertified issues, we construe such argument as a motion to expand the certificate of appealability, and we deny the motion. See 9th Cir. R. 22-1(e); Hiivala v. Wood, 195 F.3d 1098, 1104-05 (9th Cir.1999) (per curiam).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 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
227 F. App'x 684, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smithson-v-hunter-ca9-2007.