Abdalla v. Kramer

Ninth Circuit

Abdalla v. Kramer

62 F. App'x 198

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedApril 29, 2003

DocketNo. 01-16203; D.C. No. CV-97-05055-OWW

StatusPublished

This text of 62 F. App'x 198 (Abdalla v. Kramer) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Abdalla v. Kramer, 62 F. App'x 198 (9th Cir. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

*

In his habeas petition, Mohammed Spak Abdalla (“Abdalla”) contends that the state court committed constitutional error by rejecting his proposed voluntary intoxication jury instruction. However, Abdalla failed to demonstrate that the state court’s decision was contrary to clearly established United States Supreme Court precedent. See Lockyer v. Andrade, — U.S. -, -, 123 S.Ct. 1166, 1172, 155 L.Ed.2d 144 (2003). Since Abdalla failed to demonstrate that his alcohol consumption affected his mental capacity or intent, a voluntary intoxication instruction was not warranted or constitutionally required. See Clabourne v. Lewis, 64 F.3d 1373, 1380 (9th Cir.1995).

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication'; and may not be cited to or by the courts of tiiis circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

MEMORANDUM

*

In his habeas petition, Mohammed Spak Abdalla (“Abdalla”) contends that the state court committed constitutional error by rejecting his proposed voluntary intoxication jury instruction. However, Abdalla failed to demonstrate that the state court’s decision was contrary to clearly established United States Supreme Court precedent. See Lockyer v. Andrade, — U.S. -, -, 123 S.Ct. 1166, 1172, 155 L.Ed.2d 144 (2003). Since Abdalla failed to demonstrate that his alcohol consumption affected his mental capacity or intent, a voluntary intoxication instruction was not warranted or constitutionally required. See Clabourne v. Lewis, 64 F.3d 1373, 1380 (9th Cir.1995).

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication'; and may not be cited to or by the courts of tiiis circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

62 F. App'x 198, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/abdalla-v-kramer-ca9-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack