Ernest Carpenter v. D. Neven ( 2018 )


Menu:
  •                            NOT FOR PUBLICATION                           FILED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       AUG 21 2018
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    ERNEST DEAN CARPENTER,                          No.    17-16865
    Petitioner-Appellant,           D.C. No. 2:11-cv-00867-APG
    v.
    MEMORANDUM*
    D. W. NEVEN and ATTORNEY
    GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF
    NEVADA,
    Respondents-Appellees.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the District of Nevada
    Andrew P. Gordon, District Judge, Presiding
    Submitted August 15, 2018**
    Before:      FARRIS, BYBEE, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    Nevada state prisoner Ernest Dean Carpenter appeals pro se from the district
    court’s judgment denying his 
    28 U.S.C. § 2254
     habeas petition. We have
    jurisdiction under 
    28 U.S.C. § 2253
    . We review the district court’s denial of a
    *
    This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
    except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
    **
    The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
    without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    section 2254 habeas petition de novo, see Gonzalez v. Duncan, 
    551 F.3d 875
    , 879
    (9th Cir. 2008), and we affirm.
    Carpenter challenges his sentence of life without parole for felony burglary
    under Nevada’s Habitual Criminal Act, 
    Nev. Rev. Stat. § 207.010
    , as cruel and
    unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment. The Nevada Supreme
    Court’s decision affirming Carpenter’s sentence was not “contrary to,” nor did it
    involve “an unreasonable application of clearly established Federal law, as
    determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.” 
    28 U.S.C. § 2254
    (d)(1);
    see Lockyer v. Andrade, 
    538 U.S. 63
    , 73 (2003). Carpenter’s felony convictions
    stretch back three decades, and include convictions for burglary, attempted grand
    larceny, and being a felon in possession of a firearm. In light of the seriousness of
    Carpenter’s offense and prior criminal history, his sentence is not so grossly
    disproportionate as to present an “extraordinary case” under the Eighth
    Amendment. See 
    id. at 77
    .
    AFFIRMED.
    2                                      17-16865
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 17-16865

Filed Date: 8/21/2018

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021