green
Positive treatment
9.8 score
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Whether the Second Amendment Secures an Individual Right
Oakes, for example, rejected a claim based on the defendant’s membership in the Kansas militia, which consisted of all able-bodied men between twenty-one and forty-five. 564 F.2d at 387 ; see also Wright, 117 F.3d at 1271–74 (similar); Hale, 978 F.2d at 1020 (similar); Warin, 530 F.2d at 105, 106, 108 (similar). 29 See, e.g., United States v. Baer, 235 F.3d 561, 564 (10th Cir. 2000); Gillespie, 185 F.3d at 710– 11; Marchese v. California, 545 F.2d 645, 646 (9th Cir. 1976); United States v. Johnson, 497 F.2d 548 , 133 Opinions of the Office of Legal Counsel in Volume 28 on carrying concea…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Neal v. Shimoda
See United States v. McDougherty, 920 F.2d 569, 572 (9th Cir.1990) (statute punishing those committing drug transactions near schools, was not unconstitutionally overinclusive by including transactions that did not involve children because the crimes still contributed to the “violent and dangerous criminal milieu Congress sought to eliminate.”); Marchese v. State of California, 545 F.2d 645, 647 (9th Cir.1976) (prohibition against possession of handguns by felons was not unconstitutionally overin-clusive by including those convicted of nonviolent crimes because persons with criminal record…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Saadiq v. State
We quoted the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: “ ‘There is a legitimate interest in minimizing the felonious use of firearms, and the legislature reasonably may decide that persons with criminal convictions have more of a tendency to commit a crime of violence than persons without criminal records.’ ” Id. (quoting Marchese v. California, 545 F.2d 645, 647 (9th Cir.1976)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Hall
In that case we held that the statute is constitutional and adopted the rationale of Marchese v. California, 545 F.2d 645, 647 (9th Cir. 1976) in explaining that the legislature is justified in prohibiting convicted felons from possessing firearms.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Rupp
This same argument was made and rejected in Marchese v. California, 545 F.2d 645, 647 (9th Cir. 1976): The right to bear arms, especially easily concealable handguns, is not the type of fundamental right to which the “compelling state interest” standard applies.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Gabriel Gurrola-Garcia
Cf. Marchese v. California, 545 F.2d 645, 647 (9th Cir. 1976).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Saulter v. Municipal Court
See also Marchese v. State of Cal. (9th Cir. 1976) 545 F.2d 645, 648 ; and cf. Harvey Aluminum (Incorporated) v. N.L.R.B. (9th Cir. 1964) 335 F.2d 749, 752-756 .) Petitioner claims that the foregoing case should be distinguished because in Parham the federal agency was only peripherally involved, whereás in this case the federal officer had personally secured the search warrant, which was used in the entry of the petitioner’s home, led the other officers into his residence, and was a percipient witness of the events giving rise to the charges that are the subject of the action below.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
E. J. CORUM, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
Jacob B. GUNN, Warden, Respondent-Appellee
v.
Jacob B. GUNN, Warden, Respondent-Appellee
75-2308.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Sep 2, 1976.
545 F.2d 645
Allen Ruby (argued), Morgan, Ruby, Franich, Schofield & Bouchier, San Jose, Cal., for petitioner-appellant., Stan Helfman, Atty. (argued), Atty. Gen. Office, San Francisco, Cal., for respondentappellee.
Wright, Sneed, Judses, Lucas.
Published
PER CURIAM:
Petitioner, a prisoner in state custody, appeals from the denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. This Court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253.
The issue raised by petitioner, that he was denied effective assistance of counsel at his 1963 conviction for kidnapping, was fully litigated at a state court hearing in 1971 when petitioner sought to strike his 1963 conviction as a prior offense. The state court determined that issue against petitioner, and the district court properly presumed that finding to be valid. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d); Hill v. Nelson, 466 F.2d 1346 (9th Cir. 1972).
The judgment of the district court is affirmed.
AFFIRMED.