No. 22-6863

Christopher Lynn Gonzales v. Susan Washburn, Superintendent, Eastern Washington Correctional Facility

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2023-02-24
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP Experienced Counsel
Tags: 28-usc-2254-d-1 due-process forcible-compulsion habeas-corpus in-re-winship jackson-v-virginia reasonable-doubt state-court-review supreme-court-law unreasonable-factual-determinations
Key Terms:
DueProcess HabeasCorpus Privacy
Latest Conference: 2023-03-24
Question Presented (AI Summary)

whether-reasonable-jurists-debate-due-process-clause-standards-jackson-v-virginia-in-re-winship

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION PRESENTED Could reasonable jurists debate whether, under the Due Process Clause standards set out in Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979), and Jn re Winship, 397 U.S. 358 (1979), the state court unreasonably applied clearly established Supreme Court law under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1) because the prosecution failed to establish “forcible compulsion,” as defined by the Oregon Supreme Court, beyond a reasonable doubt, and made unreasonable factual determinations under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(2) and (e)(1) as to the trial evidence supposedly amounting to “forcible compulsion.”

Docket Entries

2023-03-27
Petition DENIED.
2023-03-09
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/24/2023.
2023-03-06
Waiver of right of respondent Susan Washburn to respond filed.
2023-02-21
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due March 27, 2023)

Attorneys

Christopher Gonzales
Stephen Reese SadyOregon Federal Public Defender, Petitioner
Susan Washburn
Benjamin Noah GutmanOregon Department of Justice, Respondent