D'Angelo v. Ratelle
This text of 82 F. App'x 193 (D'Angelo v. Ratelle) 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.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
D’Angelo appeals the district court’s denial of his § 2254 habeas petition challenging his conviction for five counts of burglary of residential property. D’Angelo argues that he had a right to counsel at the parole revocation hearing where Cann and Adler first identified him. D’Angelo failed to raise this claim before the state court or the district court. Therefore, the issue is not properly before us and we decline to address it. See Willard v. California, 812 F.2d 461, 465 (9th Cir.1987) (refusing to entertain a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel which was not included in the petition to the district court).
With respect to D’Angelo’s remaining arguments regarding ineffective assistance of counsel, we affirm for the reasons carefully detailed in the magistrate judge’s opinion.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this 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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
82 F. App'x 193, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dangelo-v-ratelle-ca9-2003.