Silva v. McDonald
2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 120726
C.D. Cal.2012Background
- Petitioner, a California state prisoner, was convicted in 2008 of two attempted murders and related enhancements.
- At sentencing, he received a total term of 40 years to life, with concurrent terms for firearm enhancements and other stays.
- Petitioner appealed the convictions; the California Court of Appeal denied; the California Supreme Court denied review.
- Petitioner filed a federal habeas petition in 2011 and later filed a First Amended Petition after exhausting state remedies.
- The magistrate judge recommended denying the FAP and dismissing with prejudice; the district court adopted this recommendation.
- The district court also denied a COA for appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Insufficiency of evidence for §12022.53(d) firearms enhancement | Petitioner contends he did not personally fire the gun causing Mitchell’s injuries. | State court correctly applied proximate-cause theory; Granting enhancement for Jones’s injuries supports Mitchell too. | Ground One denied; substantial evidence supported the enhancement. |
| Insufficiency of evidence for §186.22(b)(1) gang enhancement | Evidence did not show specific intent to promote other gang conduct beyond the charged crimes. | Evidence showed Petitioner acted with gang affiliation and in a war with a rival gang to promote gang crime. | Ground Two denied; sufficient evidence for gang enhancement. |
| Cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment for juvenile offenders | Forty-years-to-life with parole eligibility when 16 minimizes youth considerations and is disproportionate. | No controlling Supreme Court precedent requires mitigation or yields disproportionality; parole eligibility mitigates the sentence. | Ground Three denied; sentence not shown to be grossly disproportionate under AEDPA. |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (sufficiency standard for evidence in habeas review)
- Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 362 (U.S. 2000) (AEDPA deference framework)
- Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (U.S. 2010) (juvenile nonhomicide sentencing; proportionality considerations)
- Miller v. Alabama, 132 S. Ct. 2455 (U.S. 2012) (mandatory life without parole for juveniles violates Eighth Amendment)
- Albillar, 51 Cal.4th 47 (Cal. 2010) (specific intent for gang enhancements applying to all criminal conduct)
- Emery v. Clark, 643 F.3d 1210 (9th Cir. 2011) (Albillar overruled prior Ninth Circuit interpretations for §186.22(b))
- Oates, 32 Cal.4th 1048 (Cal. 2004) (proximately causing great bodily injury suffices for §12022.53(d))
- Garcia v. Carey, 395 F.3d 1099 (9th Cir. 2005) (Garcia limited §186.22(b) specificity requirement (rejected by Albillar))