CARPENTER v. NEVEN (2018)

MEMORANDUM **

Nevada state prisoner Ernest Dean Carpenter appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253. We review the district court’s denial of a section 2254 habeas petition de novo, see Gonzalez v. Duncan, 551 F.3d 875, 879 (9th Cir. 2008), and we affirm.

Carpenter challenges his sentence of life without parole for felony burglary under Nevada’s Habitual Criminal Act, Nev. Rev. Stat. § 207.010, as cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment. The Nevada Supreme Court’s decision affirming Carpenter’s sentence was not “contrary to,” nor did it involve “an unreasonable application of clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1); see Lockyer v. Andrade, 538 U.S. 63, 73, 123 S.Ct. 1166, 155 L.Ed.2d 144 (2003). Carpenter’s felony convictions stretch back three decades, and include convictions for burglary, attempted grand larceny, and being a felon in possession of a firearm. In light of the seriousness of Carpenter’s offense and prior criminal history, his sentence is not so grossly disproportionate as to present an “extraordinary case” under the Eighth Amendment. See id. at 77, 123 S.Ct. 1166.

AFFIRMED.