Court Opinion

ID: 9441345
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 17:37:51.699909+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:28:18.458722
License: Public Domain

WALLACE, Senior Circuit Judge,
concurring:
I concur in the memorandum disposition except for the last paragraph which is unnecessary for our decision. Walker v. Martin decides the appeal. — U.S.-, 131 S.Ct. 1120, 179 L.Ed.2d 62 (2011).
I write separately to express my disappointment that neither counsel cited Walker by a Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 280(j) letter and one attorney was unaware of its existence. We rely on counsel to provide pertinent authority so that we can make correct decisions. I had found Walker myself and am perplexed that Alvarez’s counsel missed it. I am also perplexed that counsel for the State of California failed to provide Walker to us. At oral argument, counsel stated she was aware of Walker but chose not to file a 280(j) letter. Nevertheless, she was prepared to and did argue that Walker was controlling precedent. By failing to provide Walker in a 280(j) letter, the State’s counsel deprived Alvarez’s counsel of the chance to respond, and thereby deprived us of possibly helpful oral argument.