Jeffries v. Wood

9th Cir.

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Citations: 103 F.3d 827, 96 Daily Journal DAR 15306, 96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9293, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 33220, 1996 WL 730493

Decision Date: 12/20/1996

Docket Number: No. 95-99003

Jurisdiction: U.S.

Bluebook Citation: Jeffries v. Wood, 103 F.3d 827, 96 Daily Journal DAR 15306, 96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9293, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 33220, 1996 WL 730493 (9th Cir. 1996)

More Cases: 9th Cir. decisions from 1996

Citation analytics

How this case sits in the citation network, derived from CiteLaw's graph of published opinions.

★Highly CitedTop 3% most-cited · cited by 51 decisions

Citing decisions

Courts citing

Citations by decade

1990s2000s2010s

Courts citing this case

9th Cir.46

7th Cir.1

Cal. Ct. App.1

D. Kan.1

D. Nev.1

N.D. Ohio1

Most recently cited by10

2017James Hardy v. Kevin Chappell, Warden 9th Cir.
2016Hardy v. Chappell 9th Cir.
2002Sasak v. Copeland 9th Cir.
2002Silva v. Woodford 9th Cir.
2000Hoeun Yong v. Immigration & Naturalization Service 9th Cir.
2000Whelchel v. Washington 9th Cir.
1999Young v. Weston 9th Cir.
1999Wilson v. Henry 9th Cir.
1999Tapia v. Roe 9th Cir.
1998Caro v. Calderon 9th Cir.

Counts reflect decisions in the CiteLaw corpus and may lag very recent opinions.

Opinion

Patrick James JEFFRIES, Petitioner-Appellee, v. Tana WOOD, Superintendent, Respondent-Appellant.

Judges

Before: HUG, Chief Judge, GOODWIN, SCHROEDER, FLETCHER, REINHARDT, BRUNETTI, KOZINSKI, T.G. NELSON, HAWKINS, TASHIMA, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
Judges GOODWIN, BRUNETTI and HAWKINS dissent from the issuance of this order.

majority

On August 29, 1996, the Court directed the parties to submit briefs on the question of whether the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Pub.L. No. 104-132, 110 Stat. 1214 (“Act”) applied to cases filed prior to the Act’s effective date. This issue has been fully briefed and was submitted on oral argument on November 20, 1996.

A number of Ninth Circuit panels have stayed decisions pending resolution of this question. Accordingly, we have elected to announce our decision prior to issuing an opinion.

We hold that the amendments to Chapter 153 of Title 28 of the United States Code contained in Title I of the Act do not apply to cases filed in the federal courts of this Circuit prior to the Act’s effective date of April 24, 1996. A full opinion detailing the rationale for our decision, along with a decision on the merits, will be forthcoming, together with any separate concurring or dissenting opinions which members of the en bane panel may wish to file.

Judges GOODWIN, BRUNETTI and HAWKINS dissent from the issuance of this order.