9th Cir.;
14-56159

The court of appeals affirmed a judgment. The court held that the bar on second or successive petitions set forth in the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act did not apply to a motion to reopen a habeas petition that was previously dismissed on procedural grounds.

In 2001, codefendants Willard Hall and Ronnie Sherrors were convicted of first degree murder in a California state court. The trial court's jury instructions included CALJIC 2.15, which allowed the jury to infer guilt of murder from evidence that defendants were in possession of recently stolen property plus slight corroborating evidence. The California Court of Appeal affirmed, holding that the instruction, although error, was harmless. After exhausting state court remedies, Hall filed a federal habeas petition challenging the instruction. He later abandoned the petition, believing he had “co-submitted” a federal habeas petition with codefendant Sherrors. Sherrors, who filed the petition, was granted habeas relief. Hall, who had relied on Sherrors to advance their instructional error claim on Hall's behalf, found himself out in the cold.