No. 18-5066

Edward Vincent Ray v. California

Lower Court: California
Docketed: 2018-07-06
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: constitutional-challenge criminal-statute cruel-and-unusual-punishment due-process equal-protection gender-bias ineffective-assistance-of-counsel legal-interpretation overbreadth sentencing-disparities vagueness-doctrine
Latest Conference: 2018-09-24
Question Presented (from Petition)

Whether Petitioners sentence of 38yrs 4mos., violates equal protection under the law because of the disparities in Californa sentences

whether Ptitoneris sentence totaling 3Byrs. 4mas, as a first time offender at the age of 38, for Non-homicide crimes, in fact constitates cruel and unusual punishment under the state and lor federal consttutions, and is the equivalent of ife without the possibility of parole (Lwop)?

whether appellant counsel violated Petitioner's Sixth Amendment appointed Right to Effective Counsel on Appeal, and was ineffective resulting in prejudice to Pettoner lost clam y faling to raise in brefing that Pettoner's sentence constitutes cruel and unusual punishment?

whether the State of California punishes male offenders more harshly, for the same class of crimes than it does femate offnders, is the state demonstrating gender blas?

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether Petitioner's sentence of 36 years violates equal protection due to disparities in California sentences for female and male offenders for the same class of crimes

Docket Entries

2018-10-01
Petition DENIED.
2018-07-26
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/24/2018.
2018-07-18
Waiver of right of respondent State of California to respond filed.
2018-06-26
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due August 6, 2018)

Attorneys

Edward Vincent Ray
Edward Vincent Ray Jr. — Petitioner
State of California
Peggy S. RuffraOffice of the California Attorney General, Respondent