Malik Davis v. United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
2:24-cv-02173
C.D. Cal.Apr 10, 2024Background
- Malik Davis, a California state prisoner, filed a federal habeas petition seeking resentencing based on California state laws AB 333 and AB 124.
- Davis was convicted of burglary and is serving a 12-year sentence.
- His petition argues entitlement to resentencing under amendments to state sentencing and gang enhancement statutes.
- The federal court reviewed whether his claims are cognizable in federal habeas proceedings.
- The court noted Davis did not present his resentencing claims to the California Supreme Court before filing his federal petition.
- The court issued an order to show cause, giving Davis an opportunity to explain why the petition should not be dismissed for failure to state a federal claim and failure to exhaust state remedies.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether federal habeas relief is available for claims based solely on state resentencing laws | Davis claims entitlement to resentencing under new state laws | Federal courts cannot grant habeas relief for state law errors | Claims based on state law are not cognizable in federal habeas |
| Whether Davis exhausted his state court remedies | Davis filed in state superior court | Davis did not petition California Supreme Court | Petition is subject to dismissal for failure to exhaust |
Key Cases Cited
- Estelle v. McGuire, 502 U.S. 62 (federal habeas relief only for violations of the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the U.S.)
- Wilson v. Corcoran, 562 U.S. 1 (federal habeas cannot be granted for errors of state law)
- O’Sullivan v. Boerckel, 526 U.S. 838 (petitioner must exhaust state remedies by presenting federal claims to state’s highest court)
- Duncan v. Henry, 513 U.S. 364 (state courts must have an opportunity to correct alleged constitutional violations before federal habeas review)