White v. Kane

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedFebruary 14, 2011
Docket06-55940
StatusPublished

This text of White v. Kane (White v. Kane) 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
White v. Kane, (9th Cir. 2011).

Opinion

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

DUSHUN A. WHITE,  No. 06-55940 Petitioner-Appellant, v.  D.C. No. CV-05-08237-GAF A. P. KANE, ORDER Respondent-Appellee.  Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Gary A. Feess, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted February 7, 2011* Pasadena, California

Filed February 14, 2011

Before: Dorothy W. Nelson, Stephen Reinhardt, and N. Randy Smith, Circuit Judges.

COUNSEL

Arthur Henry Weed, Santa Barbara, California, for the petitioner-appellant.

Heather Bushman, Deputy Attorney General, Office of the California Attorney General, Los Angeles, California, for the respondent-appellee.

* The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

2325 2326 WHITE v. KANE ORDER

Respondent-Appellee Kane’s motion to dismiss this case is granted. In light of the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Swarthout v. Cooke, ___ S. Ct. ___, 2011 WL 197627 (Jan. 24, 2011), Petitioner White’s request for a certificate of appealability is foreclosed.

The motion to dismiss is GRANTED.

DISMISSED.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
White v. Kane, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/white-v-kane-ca9-2011.