⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

The Ninth Circuit considers whether Jonathan Skenandore understood the crime when he pleaded guilty to second-degree murder. He originally faced first-degree felony murder after an eighteen-year-old was killed during a planned robbery. The plea reduced his exposure, but second-degree murder required implied malice: extreme recklessness and conscious disregard for human life. Due process requires a guilty plea to be knowing and voluntary, including an understanding of the offense's essential elements. On federal habeas review—a federal court's review of a state conviction—the court cannot grant relief merely because it disagrees with the state court; the state decision must be legally or factually unreasonable. The district court granted relief, finding that the record kept explaining felony murder rather than implied malice. Nevada appeals.

Skenandore v. Bean, et al. (No. 25-3475) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued August 10, 2026.