You can read the decision of Judge Carney here, and an 18-page supplement to the decision here. The supplement shows the length of time the death row inmates are waiting for review of their cases. 30+ years is not an infrequent figure in the supplement.
Today, three judges of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, as a matter of "discretion" (they had an option to agree with Judge Carney or not to agree) disagreed with Judge Carney, on procedural grounds only, and reversed his decision, thus reinstating the death penalty in California.
The names of these judges are:
Here is the biographical information of Judge Susan P. Graber (see also this link for fuller information):
Judge Graber is 66 years old, graduated from two privileged schools, Wellesley College in 1969 and Yale Law School in 1972 and has a prosecutorial background.
Judge Graber is a white female.
Biographical information of Judge Johnie B. Rawlinson (see also fuller information at this link):
Judge Rawlinson is 63 and has a prosecutorial background.
Judge Rawlinson is an African American female.
Biographical information of Judge Paul J. Watford (see fuller information here):
Judge Watford was a law clerk to the "movies-with-booze-in-the-federal courthouse" Judge Kozinski, and also has a prosecutorial background.
Judge Watford is a Hispanic/African American (looking) male.
I wrote today about election by fraud of an African American judge Christina Ryba in New York.
I wrote on this blog about election of a female judge Lisa Fisher (Greene County Supreme Court, NY) and of a female homosexual judge Elizabeth Garry (Appellate Division 3rd Department), in the same State of New York.
Those elections were heralded as proclaiming "diversity on the bench".
We have diversity here.
And, this diverse panel uniformly refused to do its duty and review a federal constitutional claim presented to them by the death inmate.
This diverse panel refused to even look whether the State of California is, indeed, violating constitutional prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment in how it handles post-conviction death penalty procedures (that same "exhaustion of state remedies" that Judge Watford cited as a reason of his rejection of a federal constitutional claim that he was sworn to review).
The summary of the decision (you can read the full text of the decision here) where three judges refused to consider "novel" constitutional issues raised on an appeal from a death penalty habeas corpus petition, is contained in three short paragraphs: