ADVERTISEMENTS

Doe v. Woodford, No. 06-16154 (11-27-07). This habeas concerned a plea to a sentence of 25 to life for a planned murder. The petitioner, a juvenile, alleges IAC because his lawyer did not undertake additional mental health investigation and that he allowed detectives to interview petitioner. The 9th refuses to expand the COA on these two issues, because two mental health experts, who examined petitioner, found him competent and not suffering from any mental disorder. The interview was designed to foster plea negotiations, which lead to an offer of 25 to life. The 9th considered the one COA issue, whether petitioner had sufficient time to consider the plea, which was held open for two hours (the jury had been selected). The 9th held that it was sufficient as evidenced by the colloquy.

Beaty v. Schriro, No. 05-99013 (11-28-07). Statements made in a jail sponsored therapy session were not involuntary nor were part of a confidentiality agreement. The petitioner here was a member of a group therapy session where, in response to comments directed at him by other inmate participants, he made statements to the supervising treating doctor about how "he didn't mean to kill" the young victim. The 9th affirmed the district court's denial of relief on this ground (the matter was a remand for this purpose).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.