Dungan v. Barnes
This text of 491 F. App'x 851 (Dungan v. Barnes) 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
California state prisoner Eric Kenneth Dungan 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, and we affirm.
Dungan contends that insufficient evidence was presented at trial to support his conviction for second degree murder. We agree with the district court that the state court’s determination that sufficient evidence supported Dungan’s conviction was not contrary to, or an unreasonable application of, Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 318-19, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979), or “based on an unreasonable determination of the facts” in light of the state court record. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1) & (2); see Harrington v. Richter, — U.S. -, 131 S.Ct. 770, 785, 178 L.Ed.2d 624 (2011); Juan H. v. Allen, 408 F.3d 1262, 1275 n. 13 (9th Cir.2005).1
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
491 F. App'x 851, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dungan-v-barnes-ca9-2012.