Oscar Rodriguez v. DANIEL PARAMO, Warden

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
OSCAR RODRIGUEZ,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
DANIEL PARAMO, Warden,
Respondent - Appellee.
No. 10-55104
D.C. No. 8:06-cv-00878-VAP-
MAN
Central District of California,
Santa Ana
ORDER
Before: GOULD and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges, and LEMELLE, District
Judge.*
The memorandum disposition in the above-captioned matter filed on January
13, 2014 is amended as follows:
At page 4, line 14, insert a new paragraph stating: <Appellant further
contends that the use of jury instructions in his trial that were based on the holding
of Johnson violated his due process rights because of what he describes as later
shifts in the law. However, because Johnson was not overruled by Howard and
there is no indication that the amended version of section 2800.2 was intended to
operate retroactively, the state courts’ reliance on Johnson in upholding appellant’s
FILED
APR 16 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* The Honorable Ivan L.R. Lemelle, District Judge for the U.S. District
Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, sitting by designation.

-- 1 of 2 --

conviction did not violate his right to due process. The district court did not err in
denying his petition for habeas corpus on this ground.>.
The panel has voted to deny the petition for panel rehearing. The full court
has been advised of the petition for rehearing en banc and no judge has requested a
vote on whether to rehear the matter en banc. Fed. R. App. P. 35. The petition for
panel rehearing and the petition for rehearing en banc are denied.
No future petitions for rehearing or rehearing en banc will be entertained.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

-- 2 of 2 --