# Brian Parker v. Larry Small

> Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · December 27, 2011 · 665 F.3d 1143

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9485140

## Case

- **Full name:** Brian Lee PARKER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Larry SMALL, Warden; Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorney General of the State of California, Respondents-Appellees
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
- **Decided:** December 27, 2011
- **Citations:** 665 F.3d 1143; 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 25836; 2011 WL 6760343
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Thomas
- **Judges:** Wallace, Thomas, Albritton
- **Cited by:** 15 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9485140

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- explaining that 23 eliciting the jurors’ views on the merits could indicate coercion
- explaining the coercive effect of a trial judge’s decision to revisit 26 select pieces of evidence to respond to juror concerns

## Opinion text

THOMAS, Circuit Judge,
concurring:
Under the circumstances presented by this case, I join my colleagues in affirming the district court’s denial of Parker’s petition for habeas corpus. I write separately only to emphasize that the supplemental jury instruction issued in this case could have an unconstitutionally coercive effect in other contexts, even under the deferential standard of review imposed by AED- *1150 PA. Federal habeas review of the Moore instruction in future cases, as in this one, will rest on evaluation of the instruction “in its context and under all the circumstances.” Lowenfield v. Phelps, 484 U.S. 231, 237 , 108 S.Ct. 546 , 98 L.Ed.2d 568 (1988) (quoting Jenkins v. United States, 380 U.S. 445, 446 , 85 S.Ct. 1059 , 13 L.Ed.2d 957 (1965) (per curium)) (internal quotation marks omitted).

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9485140. Public record. Not legal advice.